IRLS 300 Week 4 Forum
Politics and the form of leadership is an essential factor in internal management and international relation. Since World War I, the ways of governance have been critical in development. The most debated form are authoritarian and democratic leadership. The latter is mostly practice among western nations and gets praises for giving people freedom of self-determination. However, authoritarian regimes always gets negative attention for not meeting some of the fundamental standards for leadership and human rights. Though most media always negatively publicize dictatorship, the leaders do believe they serve the best interest of their people. For this reason, the Russian leadership is often considered authoritarian, but there is little evidence that proves the country has a sense of democracy.
Theoretically, the Russian government is supposed to take a democratic approach. The construction provides distinct branches of government with specific roles. The state is head by a president with executive power. Besides, the president appoints the prime minister, with the approval of the legislature, to head the government. The country also has a legislature divided into two houses and a judiciary. However, since the Soviet Union fell in 1991, Russia has gone through many hurdles to uphold the democracy enshrined in the constitution. The arms of government have always conflicted about their oversite role. The situation got worse when Vladimir Putin took power in 1999. This dilemma does make people view Russia as authoritarian, while others see her as democratic.
Vladimir Putin is the face of the authoritarian government since he has had an influence on politics for two decades. Though the constitution limits the president to two consecutive terms of four years, Putin has managed to play around to be close to power. Since 2000, Putin has either been the president of the prime minister. When his second presidential term expired in 2008, he supported a friend for the presidency who will appoint him as prime minister and hand over him the administration. Refusing to hand over leadership is one of the main characteristics of dictators. The control Putin has had over the leadership of Russia made the government question his proposed changes in 2019, leading to mass resignation. Besides clinging to power, Putin corrupted the judiciary and legislature, who are supposed to provide oversite role. His infiltration into these arms of government was evident when he was cleared as prime minister in 2004, and allowed to be president for two more terms. Additionally, he created anti-protest laws that made his ascent to power easier.
Despite this truth about dictatorship, Russia has some sense of democracy though some people call it “managed democracy.” The Russian constitution states the role of government and other institutions that offer checks and balances. Putin has upheld these instructions but reformed them that they only serve his purpose. First, he talks of independents institutions, yet he has weakened them and strengthened the presidency. Second, Putin talks of freedom of the media, yet they are state-controlled. The laws he passed only favored is candidature. Over the past years, vocal anti-government politicians have been killed or exiled. However, one of the reforms Putin proposed was that a presidential candidate must have live in Russia for the past 25 years. When these laws are made, the public is expected to assume the president followed a constitutional process that involved consultation.
In summary, Russian governance is a hybrid of authoritarianism and democracy. The constitution provides the laws and institutions for democratic rule. However, as a young democracy, the constitution had loopholes that allowed the president to manipulate the laws. Since Putin got to the government as prime minister in 1999, he has used the constitutional weakness to strengthen his position and eliminate opposing powers.