Hard times for President Putin
Not only does he have difficulties in wresting back control of the internet, but there is public uproar against his decision to increase the retirement age.
Something rather unusual is happening in Russia. No, it’s not the recent farce of the two GRU officers trying to convince the world that they visited Salisbury “to admire the 14th century Gothic Cathedral”, when in fact they were there to murder Sergei Skripal. Nor is it the Kremlin’s embarrassment caused by the four GRU officers caught by the Dutch security service in a failed cyber operation targeting the world’s chemical weapons watchdog in The Hague, which at the time was examining the Salisbury poisoning. What is unusual is President Vladimir Putin’s failing ability to maintain control in Russia.
From the moment of his election in 2000, Putin set about controlling the organs of the state, including the media and regional government. This was his strategy for staying in power for as long as he wished. Most Russians welcomed his arrival and firm leadership following the chaotic nine years of the Boris Yeltsin government. The fortuitous rise in oil price shortly after his arrival allowed him to re-build both society and the depleted armed forces. Suddenly, the world again listened to Rus- sia and the Russian people liked that.
Throughout his time in the Kremlin, Putin has attempted to tread the tightrope of silencing any criticism without being accused of Sovietstyle oppression. He wants to maintain the image of an open society, but prevent any opposition to his autocratic rule. To achieve this he needs to know what people are saying, to be able to read their emails and to suppress and punish any criticism of the Kremlin.
Understandably, many Russians don’t want their emails read by the security services and have turned to a popular messaging app called Telegram, founded by Russian entrepreneur Pavel Durov in 2013. The Kremlin’s problem was that in order to read messages on Telegram they needed access to users’ encrypted key, which, despite a court order, the company refused to hand over. Durov, sometimes called the Russian Mark Zuckerberg, has since fled to the West following an armed raid on his home.
As they couldn’t access the information, Russia’s authorities started trying to block Telegram in April this year, but in a classic example of the “law of unintended consequences”, they caused mayhem on the internet by inadvertently blocking many legitimate web services vital to business in Russia. In any case, canny internet users quickly moved to virtual private networks, making the ban meaningless.
President Putin’s efforts to control opinion and opposition groups are also being frustrated. In a crackdown in 2014, the so called Article 282 of the Criminal Code was amended to enable the prosecution of internet users who “incite hatred against individuals or groups on the basis of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, or membership in a social group”. A noble objective, but the real aim was to provide law enforcement officers with a surgically targeted tool for use against opposition forces in Russia. Instead, it has led to a backlash against the Kremlin from all levels of society.
Mid-August saw the protest in Moscow of an estimated 2,000 on a “mother’s march” against the egregious abuse of Article 282. As with all laws, it’s the interpretation which is important and this law allowed the “Siloviki”, or representatives of power structures, to crack down on mostly young offenders whose only action was to share nothing worse than internet memes. A high level of convictions followed, resulting in some cases of prison sentences or even admissions to psychiatric hospitals. There were even reports of university students providing the Soliviki with tip-offs which rewarded them materially; worrying echoes of the worst of the Soviet era.
Russian parents were outraged by this interpretation of Article 282, which frequently resulted in their children being added to an official register of extremists and terrorists. If they were, and there were 461 examples in 2017, the young people found it impossible to use a credit or debit card or withdraw more than 10,000 roubles (about Rs 11,000). It also makes it difficult for offenders to keep a job, let alone find a new one.
The internet giant, Mail.ru Group, which owns the largest social networks in Rus- sia, VK and Odnokklassniki (“Classmates”) has harshly condemned the practice of filing criminal charges against social media users simply for likes or reposts on social networks, calling most convictions not only unjust but also absurd. Even the Communist lawmaker, Sergei Shargunov, said, “If Article 282 were taken literally, certain zealots would have to convict Pushkin, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, and have their works removed!”
These criticisms, remarkable from a communist, have reached the ear of President Putin who has personally submitted amendments to Article 282 which would reserve criminal charges and prison sentences for repeat offenders and those who call for violence. Internet users were dismayed, however, because on the very day that Putin intervened to amend Article 282, he signed into law a bill which threatened those who repeatedly fail to remove “disputed” (sic) information from the internet with up to two years in prison. Also, internet users can still end up behind bars and be labelled extremists for, among other things, offending the “feelings” of the faithful. Expect further protests.
These are challenging times for President Putin following the embarrassing unmasking of GRU spies. Not only does he have difficulties in wresting back control of the internet, but there is public uproar against his decision to increase the retirement age, resulting in plummeting popularity ratings. Add to that, the Kremlin’s favoured gubernatorial candidates suffered surprise electoral losses last month in four of Russia’s regions. Could Putin’s control be weakening? Kremlin watchers will be eagerly looking to see how and when he fights back. The last time his poll ratings were falling, he invaded Crimea.