Putin basks in a win he always saw coming
AAs in previous Russian elections, real opposition politicians were barred from running
meme circulating on social media since 2022 shows Vladimir Putin in a train, staring into a window, his own image reflected back at him. The caption says: “Putin looking at his successor.” For years now, noone has seriously doubted that Putin could be succeeded by anyone but himself.
Last weekend, Putin won another six-year term by a “landslide” vote of 87%. But it seems we can rest assured there was no cheating: a delegation from the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission declared the election “free, fair and credible”.
South Africa and other African countries followed suit by congratulating Putin. For him, it seems, anything is possible. A 2020 amendment to the Russian constitution “nullified” the Russian leader’s previous terms in office, meaning this will be his “first”. But if Putin sees his next term through, he will be the longest-ruling Russian leader since Catherine the Great.
After the death of Alexei Navalny, widely believed to have been assassinated, the prospect of viable opposition in Russia is bleaker than ever. But Russian activists are determined that the prospect of democracy in Russia should not die with Navalny. As in previous Russian elections, real opposition politicians were barred from running. The token opposition parties that did make it onto the ballot were all approved by the Kremlin.
According to independent observers, the election was the least transparent of the last two decades. Five-million votes for Putin were reported to have come from Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine. In the Donbas, people were at times voting while being watched by armed Russian soldiers.
How did Russians decide to navigate an election in which the outcome was a foregone conclusion? To Putin-weary Russians the election was an opportunity to show dissent and bravery. Voting outside the Russian embassy in Berlin, Navalny’s widow, Yulia, told reporters she wrote his name on the ballot paper.
On the final day of the election, hundreds gathered at Navalny’s grave in southern Moscow with cards and carnations in a symbolic vote for him. “We choose you,” said one tribute.
From March 15, the first day of the election, voters attacked ballot boxes. Some burnt ballots, some threw Molotov cocktails into voting stations and others used a green antiseptic dye known as zelyonka to damage ballots.
Resisting Putin means risking decades in prison.
But what do these acts of resistance really say about the public mood? It would be tempting to conclude that the resistance shows a growing general disapproval of Putin.
Some commentators have written of “two Russias ”— one represented by Putin and one represented by those brave enough to openly protest against his policies. While press freedom has been on the decline ever since Putin took power, the war on Ukraine led to an unprecedented clampdown on independent media as well as a string of new laws punishing dissent. This makes it difficult to gauge the public mood.
As voters were casting or spoiling ballots, shelling on the Ukrainian front intensified. But the loss of life on the Russian side has also been staggering. According to US intelligence reports, more than 300,000 Russian soldiers have been killed since the start of the war in February 2022. Wives and mothers of soldiers fighting in Ukraine who have campaigned for their children to be sent home have been threatened and intimidated.
As expected, President Cyril Ramaphosa was quick to congratulate Putin. In doing so, South Africa once again joined the company of unfree states. Predictably, Chinese President Xi Jinping congratulated Putin with the words: “Your re-election is a full demonstration of the support of the Russian people for you.” In a similar vein, Felix Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of Congo called the election an “eloquent testimony to the confidence of the Russian people in you”.
Ramaphosa said South Africa “will continue to engage both the Russian Federation and Republic of Ukraine in search of lasting peace” between the two countries. South Africa’s position as a mediator, of course, is eroded by its strong support for Russia. It also simply does not have the influence to affect this conflict one way or the other.
But how serious can South Africa be about its alleged interest in international peace and security? In continuing to support Putin, the country is supporting a man who has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons if Russia’s sovereignty or independence is threatened. He could interpret new states such as Sweden recently joining Nato as an infringement of Russia’s sovereignty.
In another recent meme, Putin looks into a train window and sees Hitler reflected back at him. South Africa should ask itself who exactly it is supporting when it congratulates him.