Below I want to have a general discussion of what you learned about Russian politics from the documentary. For credit, post your initial reaction/response about what you learned and respond to at least two other posts. I want this to serve as a class discussion about the documentary, as we will not have time in class to discuss it. As a guide, here are some questions you might want to consider.
What have you learned about Russian politics after viewing this documentary? How does this documentary help illustrate corporatism and clientelism? Do you think Khodorkovsky will ever get out of prison? What do you think the motivation was for his imprisonment? How can this documentary shed light on the political culture in Russia? How has the power of oligarchs changed since Putin's rise to power in 2000? Why was running a "clean" business seen as such a threat to the Russian way of business? What does this documentary illustrate about the nature of political opposition in Russia? How do some of the events depicted in this documentary relate to recent events and headlines involving the Russian government?
Again, I want this to be a discussion, so please be concise and targeted in your responses to the posts of your classmates as well as your initial response as to what you learned from it.
This happened today:
ReplyDeleteBoris Nemtsov, Putin Foe, Is Shot Dead in Shadow of Kremlin
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/28/world/europe/boris-nemtsov-russian-opposition-leader-is-shot-dead.html
I've actually learned a lot about Russian politics from watching the documentary on Khodorkovsky. The documentary shows how Vladimir Vladimirovich (Putin) is able to maintain control through corporatism/clientalism as well as coercion. Khodorkovsky obtained Yukos for pennies on the dollar (or ruble) because it was in the country's best interests to maintain control of their oil. He was a very progressive figure, and ignored Putin's intimidation. Khodorkovsky is the epitome of corruption in the Russian government. The reason for his arrest was that he opposed Putin. He supported the opposition. This shows how the Russian political culture revolves around a strong, central government and a powerful, charismatic leader. After centuries of Tsarist (autocratic) rule as well as Stalin's reign of terror, the Russian people have accepted this illiberal form of government as long as the government is stable. After Putin came to power in 2000, the power of the oligarchs has severely diminished. A "clean" business is simply not possible in the corrupt Russian society. If you want your business to succeed you need to have friends in the police force and/or the administration. If you don't have friends, you need to make friends ($$$).
Political opposition to Putin in Russia is very weak. Putin's approval is currently at 86% (http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/26/europe/vladimir-putin-popularity/)! Those who oppose Putin (like Khodorkovsky and Nemtsov - see article above) don't go very far. Another example of how Putin is able to suppress opposition was the imprisonment of the Pussy Riot protest group in 2012.
Side note: House of Cards Season 3 Episode 3 (released today at 3 am) does a good job of illustrating some of these concepts, especially those about the Pussy Riot and Vladimir Vladimirovich.
I would also like to point out that it is a possibility that depending on your influence on the public, the opposition can be dealt with in different ways. While Nemtsov was less influential he could be more easily disposed off; however, Khodorkovsky known by most, had to be dealt with by different means.
DeleteI found it interesting when you pointed out that "After centuries of Tsarist (autocratic) rule as well as Stalin's reign of terror, the Russian people have accepted this illiberal form of government as long as the government is stable."I agree that history and cultural traditions definitely play a role in the public views government. Therefore, I think history definitely affects how the public views the government, passively accepting authoritarian government and ruler to ensure their security and well-being.
DeleteI found it interesting how you pointed out that Putin has an 86% approval rate. This shows the extent Putin goes to take out any people who threaten his position, and only leaves people who support him in the government. It reinforces how Russia utilizes corporatism and cilentelism, so that only people who benefit and support Putin are allowed to stay.
DeleteI agree with your assertion on the political culture of Russia. Its people seem to be more inclined towards accepting a strong, authoritarian leader who is able to wield much power. You made good points in finding examples from Russia's history as in Tsarist and Soviet rule to illustrate this political culture.
DeleteI agree with your comment that political opposition is very difficult. This is one of the aspects of the documentary that I also realized and at first I was shocked and how powerful the government is but then by the end of the documentary I came to believe that their authoritarian rule and strict government is exactly what keeps Russia such a strong and rather successful country.
DeleteInteresting article you presented us with. It just goes to show that any threat to Putin's regime will be put down. This sort of goes against the statement I made in my original comment that Khodorkovsky was lucky that he was well known, otherwise he would've been killed like Nemtsov. Although Nemtsov was well known, Aaron pointed out that the influence they had on the public can also play a role in how the opposition is dealt with. The intimidation put out by this event would further discourage opposing Putin's power.
Deletehttp://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/02/28/uk-russia-nemtsov-idUKKBN0LV2L820150228
DeleteSimilar article, found an interesting statement:
"Others saw the murder as a result of a climate of fear where Putin demands total loyalty and supporters go to great lengths to do what they think may please him."
This may indicate how the public is aware that Putin likes to stay in control and this incident could incite more protesters to oppose his ideology.
I have learned that Russians politics relies on a strong central government with rather weak opposition parties, that are kept that way by the central government. The documentary on Khodorkovsky illustrates corporatism and clientelism because a specific group of people were gifted with the ability to create and buy large companies in return for support of the government. However, since Khodorkovsky got involved in politics he was thrown in jail by Putin presumably. I believe that it is still possible for Khodorkovsky to get out of prison, however, probably not while Putin is in office. Moreover, the Russian political culture relies on a strong central government, with a charismatic leader and attempts to eradicate or weaken greatly any opposition parties. Moreover, since 2000 i believe the Russian oligarchs have lost almost all true power, due to Khodorkovsky arrest many fear the same thing will happen to them. Making them believe that opposing Putin is a bad idea and instilling fear into their hearts. Furthermore, running a clean business was a threat to the Russian way of business because most if not all major businesses in Russia at the time were created in a corrupt way. In closing the documentary illustrates that political opposition in Russia will not get very far, because the central government will do anything to maintain power.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is not possible to run a clean business in Russia due to clientelism. This is because businesses are granted and established in return for support of the government and Putin. Therefore, it is impossible to seperate politics and business in Russia. Government always intervenes in the markets and businesses, thus increasing their own power in the country.
DeleteI agree that the oligarchs since 2000 have lost their power because of this Khodorkovsky situation. Putin made an example out of Khodorkovsky, one of the most successful businessman in Russia, of what happens if they oppose Putin politically. Opposing Putin is a futile endeavor because he can easily arrest the oligarchs and replace them with those who are loyal to him.
DeleteI have learned a lot about Russian politics from watching the documentary. The documentary shed light on the inner workings of the Russian economy and political structure. It showed how Putin still holds the most power and influences in the government and can arrest/detain people easily. The documentary also illustrates clientelism since Putin sold Yukos to Khodorkovsky for pennies on the dollar to keep Russian oil, Russian owned. This benefit that Putin gave to Khodorkovsky was also in exchanged for political support and to not oppose him. Khodorkovsky’s opposition toward Putin contributed to his arrest, since Putin does not want people who can threaten his rule to stay in power. I think that as long as Putin views Khodorkovsky as a threat, Khodorkovsky’s chances of getting out of prison is slim. This incident shows that Russia’s political structure is very authoritarian, since Putin did many acts to maintain his power in the government. Once Putin got to power, the power of the oligarchs seemed to wane sine he required the oligarchs to support him politically in order to stay in power. This led to some oligarchs losing their power and getting arrested, and in many cases, for tax evasion. It is difficult to run a “clean” business in Russia since in many cases, businesses need connections with the police force and other high ranked personnel to run their business smoothly. Doing business this way has become the norm. This event relates to the recent event of Boris Nemtsov’s death. He, along with other people who questioned the Kremlin over the years have also been murdered, showing the prevalence of coercion to maintain power (Putin).
ReplyDeleteIt is also true that is long as Putin remains popular in the public eye, who can more easily dispose of opposition parties without much questioning from the majority of the public.
DeleteI agree that Khodorkovsky relationship with the government illustrates the concept of clientelism. The Russian government sold him the oil business for an extremely cheap price in order to keep the oil business in Russian hands. Thus, he was able to build up great wealth and dominate the market with the help of the Russian government. Putin and Khodorkovsky could have had a similar relationship with the agreement that Khodorkovsky stay out of politics. When Khodorkovsky began supporting the opposition and criticizing Putin, he was promptly arrested and sentenced to prison.
DeleteI agree with your stance on the difficulty of running a "clean" business in Russia. I think the idea of a clean business is not really evident in Russia since the country is based off of these clientelistic businesses. Without this, the central government probably would lose some of the power they have at the moment and this would make Russia not as strong as it is right now.
DeleteI agree that Khodorkovsky will be imprisoned for a long time. Since Putin cannot kill him for the fear that it will incite rage against his presidency, it is better to make it appear that Khodorkovsky is imprisoned for legitimate reasons such as tax evasion and other charges to elongate his sentence.
DeleteThe Khodorkovsky has provided me with many insights into the political culture in Russia. The Russian government is central and strong with the government strictly controls every aspect of the citizens’ lives. The documentary illustrates corporatism and clientelism when the state-approved businesses were given benefits (Khodeorsovsky gaining Yukos for pennies on the dollar) in return by supporting the government and Putin. I think Khodorkovsky was imprisoned because he opposed Putin publicly and suggested changes in the Russian politics. Since the political culture rests on authoritarian regime with no acceptance of oppositions, Putin (in order to protect the government’s say in economics) put him in prison to warn other big business the consequences of opposing the government, thus showing the possibility of Khodorkovsky getting out of prison is limited. Therefore, it is very hard to run a clean business in Russia because the nondemocratic rule makes politics and the economy inseparable. The government strictly controls the market and the business companies depend on the government to survive by supporting it. Therefore, political oppression in Russia proves to be ineffective due to coercion and co-optation. The government can simply arrest opposition groups arbitrarily and make use of surveillance to monitor their activities. Therefore, the political opposition in Russia is ineffective and weak due to the central government and its use of massive repression and co-optation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Russia being a nondemocratic rule since it shows aspects of an illiberal regime. Elections are held, making it similar to democracy, but Putin is able to manipulate the government to where he stays in power and stays popular.
DeleteI was actually rather puzzled and surprised while watching the Khodorkovsky documentary. The reason for this was relating to Khodorkovsky's imprisonment over the past 12 years. Though it is likely that he had engaged in some shady business practices, the charges that were based against him and the conviction did not seem to hold much weight. One of these such charges of stealing massive amounts of oil for himself, was particularly odd in that Khodorkovsky explained how it was physically impossible and unthinkable for him to commit the crime. His denied appeal and subsequent sentence of an additional 6 years in prison point to an unfair and corrupt Russian judicial system. Russian president Putin is most likely behind the reasons for why Khodorkovsky is currently in prison. Khodorkovsky was an outspoken critic of Putin, and out rightly disobeyed Putin's orders when he contributed to Putin's opposition. Khodorkovsky had originally been in favor with the Russian government when he was essentially given his oil business for a much lower selling price than was offered by foreign corporations. He was able to dominate the oil oligarchy, and amass a great personal wealth. This changed when Putin rose to power in 2000, with Putin taking great lengths to curb the power of these oligarchs. Most telling of Putin's growing power is that after Khodorkovsky's arrest, many of Russia's richest business owners fled the country fearing that they would be next. Khodorkovsky's situation sheds much light into the political culture of Russia. It is interesting to see how much influence and power that Putin is able to wield. It is indicative of the Russian people's acceptance of an authoritarian, central leader who holds the majority of power. I also found out today that Khodorkovsky has actually been already pardoned by Putin in 2013. I found this highly surprising given his opposition to Putin. Also in the news, Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was murdered a few days ago. Although Putin has not been implicated, this murder sheds light into the difficulty facing the opposition groups to the current regime in Russia.
ReplyDeleteThe assassination of Boris Nemtsov, Putin's leading political opposition, truly demonstrates the difficulty the competition has in Russia. Though Putin has not been implicated with the incident, I do not think it is a coincidence that he was killed. With the Ukraine situation getting a drift in the country, allowing for opposition to grow and capitalize on this opportunity to gain supporters against Putin, he needed to reaffirm his control by taking out another alpha wolf.
DeleteThe biggest aspect of the movie and of Russian politics that intrigued me was the central government’s extreme power and hunger for rule and power over anything and everything. I’m shocked at how the ruler and the government instill fear to the people in order to strengthen the country and keep Russia a strong central government. I also learned about Russia’s charismatic legitimacy and how that helped keep the ruler in power. Clientelism was shown in the documentary and allowed me to develop a better perspective of what clientelism actually is. It is exemplified how businesses are made and created in return for support and approval of Putin. The strict control Putin has over these businesses and corporations is what keeps the central government so strong. The extreme strength makes it difficult, almost impossible maybe, for any opposing forces to even start to change the central government. I would say that even though I have previous knowledge on Russia and its politics, this documentary did shock me a little because I wasn’t aware of all the underlying aspects that came off as very twisted in the documentary. It opened my mind and eyes to a new, more educated, perspective of Russia and I am glad I had the opportunity to learn more about the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Putin's strong, authoritative leadership is what has allowed him to stay in power for so long. However, there exist certain factions of the public that disagree with his methodology. His strict regime leaves little room for disagreement, which many people disapprove of. There are also many people who believe that Putin does not deserve to be in power because of the off-handed ways he deals with those who disagree with his policies.
DeleteKhodorkovsky has shown me the true extent to how centralized power is in Russia in comparison to other major countries. Unlike in Western, capitalist democracies, such as the United States, where businesses have an impact on politics, in Russia the opposite is true. Putin manipulates businesses in order to sustain his tight control over the country. Political opposition to Putin is minimal and are ineffective because he does not allow them to grow into threats, rather crushes any sign of legitimate threat to instill fear into others. One part from the documentary that focused on this concept was about how you do not have to kill all the wolves in the pack, rather you just have to kill the strongest, smartest, and most beautiful wolf to scare off the rest. Putin did this by imprisoning Khodorkovsky and scaring off all of his allies to flee the country in fear that they would be next to be imprison. There is not competition for power in the country because Putin does not allow it. All of the power, whether it is directly in his hands or the hands of the oligarchs, belongs to him, hence why he he gave the Khodorkovsky oil companies in exchange for loyalty. Support Putin and the oligarchs are guaranteed success and wealth, betray him then you are assume to be a threat and treated as such. Despite the revealing nature of the documentary, it will not lead to any change to Russian politics because Russia's general population has too much support for their charismatic leader and those who have power to start change are in fear of Putin.
ReplyDeleteI do not completely agree with your statement that in Western capitalist democracies like the US, businesses have an impact on government, while in Russia, the government has an impact on the businesses. I think business and government impact each other in the US- businesses push for certain policies to get passed or rejected (eg. the constant delays in passing the Bottle Bill in Florida) and the government can also impose policies on businesses, like minimum wage and anti-trust laws. The difference is that there is a balance. In Russia, it seems from the documentary that there is no balance, and the government wields an extreme amount of power over the corporations, so that businesses must follow the orders of the government lest they be eliminated like Yukos.
DeleteFrom the documentary I have learned that there are still aspects of the Soviet government that have remained in the Russian Federation. For example the strong centralized government has remained, only with the appearance of public evolvement through "elections" where Putin remains in control of most aspects of his country. Through his manipulating of the constitution, he has all but secured his power for years to come. In the case of Khodorkovsky, a business man who was basically given the oil company to keep it in Russian hands, became a threat to Russian politics. Due to his massive wealth Khodorkovsky would amass some political influence which is certainly not tolerated by the authoritarian government of the Russian Federation. To prevent this, the government had Khodorkovsky imprisoned and charged with certain "charges" to take away his wealth, and thus eliminating the threat. The approval of the Russian people over this decision illustrates their sentiment towards a strong charismatic leader. I honestly think that Khodorkovsky will not be released, with more charges being tacked on as he nears the end of his imprisonment. If he does somehow get released, it will be his exile from Russia to a western nation such as Great Britain like the other wealthy Russian businessmen. Another way may be his assassination after he is released, to prevent him from gaining support from the public and revealing his side of the while situation.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that the Russian government effectively attempts to neutralize serious threats to its rule, I do not think that they will assassinate Khodorkovsky after he is released. Although he was imprisoned for a lengthy period of time, his name is still well known throughout the world, especially by political leaders of other nations. If Russia were to simply assassinate every opposition, then they would not have the support of any other nation and it would be difficult for the regime to survive the public pressure put upon them.
DeleteThe Khodorkovsky documentary gives a good "behind the scenes" look into the politics of the Russian Federation. It shows how corrupt the Russian leader is, since they do not want any opposing forces to get too powerful since it threatens Putin's authoritative rule. The documentary showed how Khodorkovsky challenged Putin's power by ignoring his attempt at intimidation and also pushing for more progressive ideas. In effect, Putin took Khodorkovsky out of power by imprisoning him for, what seems like, forever. However, lucky for Khodorkovsky, he is an important and well known figure throughout the world, otherwise Putin may have decided to remove him permanently rather than imprisoning him. As for his prison sentence, I do not think Khodorkovsky will be free anytime soon. His threat to Putin's reign and his popularity is dangerous and unless there is another leader for Russia, I do not see Khodorkovsky being released. Unless they convince Khodorkovsky to keep quiet and support the current Russian leader, the Russian government will find something to blame Khodorkovsky for and consequently, extend his prison term. Additionally, the idea of running a "clean" business simply would not function in Russia. Since it is so corrupt in Russia, a business would only survive if they become corrupt as well by friending officials and officers with bribes and such.
ReplyDeleteRussian politics is very repressive of the opposition and chooses to follow a central leader who holds most of the public opinion in his manipulation. This is a fine example of clientelism, as Putin sold the Yukos oil company to Khodorkovsky in return for public support. Once Khodorkovsky opposed him and threatened Putin’s legitimacy in power, however, that’s when he stepped over the line and got arrested. Political culture in Russia depends on a strong central government with a charismatic leader who can dispel any opposition, and a big factor into that is instilling fear into any potential opposing parties. Because of Khodorkovsky, oligarchies have probably been discouraged because of the power that Putin exercised. Clean businesses are then not very viable options because corruption is rampant in Russian business; not adhering to said corruption would create opposition and cause the company to stand out. Russian government wants to domesticate any political opposition by exercising their power in any way possible so they maintain face.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that Putin does manipulate the media to a way that benefits his rule, I also think that much of it has been exaggerated by the American media, as they view him as a threat and try to exonerate him to gain leverage over the rapidly expanding Russian power. For example, there is much mystery surrounding who shot MH17, and if you really think about it, the media is heavily biased against Russia. However, there are no proper motives for shooting down a passenger plane, and if there was they would have taken credit for it. Instead, because Russia was blamed for it, an excuse was created to economically sanction them. So while Putin may have his shortcomings as a ruler, exercising too much control, he is likely not as bad as he is perceived in America, but also not as popular as his approval ratings make him out to be.
DeleteAlthough Russia is officially a republic, traces of its authoritarian regime are found in its modern day government. This is evident by the unjust treatment given to people who publicly oppose President Putin. Khodorkovsky, who got involved with politics despite Putin's urges not to, found himself locked up in a Siberian prison for ten years for charges that prosecution could not prove. This past weekend, Boris Nemtsov, a vehement critic of President Putin, was killed after admitting that he had evidence of Russian armed forces in Ukraine, even though Putin repeatedly denied it. Political culture in Russia appreciates a strong head of government, yet tolerates very little dissent. Khodorkovsky was jailed for going against Putin, and not because he had been accused tax fraud or stealing 350 million tons of oil. Putin pardoned Khodorkovsky in 2013, which was surprising because I originally believed that he would remain in prison until Putin was out of power. When Khodorkovsky was initially arrested in 2003, other oligarchs fled Russia in fear of being imprisoned. In this way, Putin has gained power over prominent economic tycoons. Business is fine and can help the Russian economy, but only as long as it's in the interest of the government. As shown by the documentary, clientelism is common in Russia. As a matter of fact, clientelism is how Khodorkovsky got a hold of the Yukos oil corporation in the first place. Clean business is possible, but it's more likely to be corrupted for the sake of achieving political goals.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree, clientelism is definitely widespread in Russia. Corporatism, too, is a very common practice, which is illustrated by Putin's swift disposal of Yukos by other corporations considered more loyal to the state. I was also surprised that Putin let Khodorkovsky out of prison, but it was likely a calculated political move, in order to show that he was not afraid of Khodorkovsky gaining power once again. Moreover, since Khodorkovsky cannot even return to Russia, his release was definitely meant to show Putin's strength and confidence in his regime.
DeleteThe documentary really helped me better understand some of Russia's politics, especially its involvement in business. Businesses and business leaders like Khodorkovsky who did not support Putin were eliminated, so that Putin might retain his authoritarian control over the state. On the other hand, those who did support Putin were helped, which is a perfect example of corporatism. Through corporatism, Putin's regime can becomes stronger due to the backing of powerful people and corporations. In order for Putin to maintain his power, he will probably not let Khodorkovsky back into Russia, or else he may seem weak to the Russian public. Moreover, it seems as though much of the Russian public actually supported Khodorkovsky's imprisonment and exile, because of his former status as an oligarch. He was yet another symbol of the corruption in the system. It was interesting to me that while some of the Russians might support his fall from power, much of the West wanted him freed. This is because of his actions like establishing Open Russia, which aimed to eliminate some of the corruption from politics by increasing transparency. It could also be because of his status as a symbol of capitalism.
ReplyDeleteThe documentary is especially relevant in light of the recent death of Boris Nemtsov, a rival politician of Putin. Throughout the years, many other political opponents and dissenters have been similarly eliminated, in order for Putin to consolidate and maintain his power. It is clear from the documentary and from recent headlines that Putin's Russia is becoming more and more authoritarian in nature.
The documentary gave me a better understanding of the many intricacies of Russian politics. It illustrated Putin’s methods to maintain power and control over the Russian people, and brought to light many of the corrupt ways of the Russian government. Similar to other communist countries such as China, much of your life (money, influence, etc) depends on who you know rather than what you know, and without the proper connections it is extremely difficult to become successful. An example of this is how cheaply Khodorkovsky acquired Yukos for, and how profitable it became. Also, Putin effectively eliminates much of the serious opposition to his rule, whether it be through arrests like in Khodorkovsky’s case or assassinations like Nemtsov’s. This brings about absurdly high approval ratings for Putin, as people are afraid of what will happen to them if they have different viewpoints on policies or other things, especially when considering what has happened to many of the opposition leaders.
ReplyDelete