Constitutional reform in Russia announced.

[ikalugin]

On the regular adress to Federal Assembly Putin announced a comprehensive constitutional reform with decrease in presidential power, increase in parliamentary power, more checks and balanced.

The reform would be enacted only if it passes a country wide referendum which was also announced to be in the works.

Looks like Putin is really leaving the big politics and preparing the system for the transition and the post-Putin period.


Text in english:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/62582

[Catfish]

Hmm.. a speech that was well done, reasonable by content and information.
What a difference to what is said in some other parts of this little place called earth
But can or does Russia and mankind believe him? Does he mean what he says?

At first I did not like Putin's older speech of a multipolar world, but i have to admit - with a look at states like China and Russia - that he was right. With the US withdrawing and leaving a trade-, negotiation- and power vacuum it was only a question of time someone tried to fill that. The nation of Russia is back, and China has emerged from a long time isolation.
It is imho a backlash to civilisation and a fallback all over to a decentralised and disunited world, but just maybe a worldwide human union to explore space is unfortunately not at the doorstep.
Such a union cannot be led by one nation (east or west or what/wherever), the UN is the closest that would resemble that, but national and tribal ego prevent that.

Regarding this speech (which i see positive) i wonder why he emphasizes the demographic aspect so much. Feeding and education(!) for human children is mandatory alright, but supporting the birth rate by all means.. should not there be less people on earth?

We see that the more "modern" or developed a society becomes, the less individuals will live in it, from a certain standard of nutrition and overall living on, humans can now suddenly afford to have less children to support the elders, women will have the right to decide whether they want children or not, and they will insist on their right.
Also, does Putin want to get on par with the (out of bounds) chinese population?
Does not Russia have enough workers, wouldn't it be better to automate certain work and push education for inventing better automated systems and handling them.
Yes, in the second part of the speech he mentioned education, to improve schooles and universities, and how to finance them. Good. But more children will also mean more money needed, to support the institutions accompanying them while growing up.

You wrote

Putin announced a comprehensive constitutional reform with decrease in presidential power, increase in parliamentary power, more checks and balanced.

I do not quite see where you read this in his speech.?

I wish you and Russia that it works out well, for more prosperity and satisfaction for the russian people.

[ikalugin]

https://tass.ru/politika/7528017
Meanwhile Medvedev resighned.

[ikalugin]

As to the demographics - there is currently a shortage of labour, which is why unemployement is so low.


Due to the size of our territory and desire for greater autonomy we need more people.
And right now this is less about increase in population but in maintaining current population - current birth rates are significantly below replenishment rates meaning that the population (particularly portion of the young people capable of working) is going down. Getting to the level of Chinese (or Indians - who outpaced China) is not the current objective and is not in general plausible.

[ikalugin]

Also there was a lot about climate, support for small businesses, free internet for important Russian web resources and so on.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Regarding this speech (which i see positive) i wonder why he emphasizes the demographic aspect so much. Feeding and education(!) for human children is mandatory alright, but supporting the birth rate by all means.. should not there be less people on earth?

Chinese people are entering the parts of Russia along their shared border, and they de facto change the ethnic structure of population in these huge empty areas, mainly by traders moving back and frth and forming settlements and trading outposts, markets, etc. . This can become a threat and a political, and military risk, due to different cultural and national loyalties. Also, that we are too many people on the pkanet does nto mean populations levels musta nd shoukd be "cut" similiar everywhere. The problem is that in wanted social grouos there are too few babies and in not so communal supprtive social grouos there are too many babies. We have a similair problem in Germany, and pracitclala cross all the West. still, the lion'S share of the global population exolosion does nto take place in North aemrica or Russia or Europe, but in africa and South East asia.



In total, we are too many yes, I say this myself since long time. But you cnanot tackle the probem by just cutting popualtions without discmrinating between their social contexts and backgrounds, their ethnci and cukturla backgrounds, theire economic net effect on the whole. You must discriminate (seeing and acceting differences), whether you like it or not. 10 million Germans less is a big deal because it would significantly and severely damage the functionality of the German economy, social system, and would be felt across the planet. 20 million Africans or Chinese less would mean - well, anything...? I do not intend to be racist, but these are simple facts of life. States with point.systems for migraiton that they hsrhyl enforce, lie Australian, canada and others, have understood this: they need certain qulified migrants, and cannot need at all other migrants just adding to the probelms already existing in these states. Migraiton is not the smae like migration.



You must discriminate, there is no way around it. Else the damage the whole more and more until it breaks. There are differences, and these have to be considered and taken into account. Its not just al the same, and the relevance of people is not the same for each and everybody.



Its also about the survivablity of social systems if the relation between net- payers and net-receivers shift for the worse,l ike in Germany. This is not just independent for total poulation levels. its about numerical ratios between different groups. The "mix" must be right".



Have you never played Sim City...?! Some thing do not go with to small population levels, other things do not go if the balancing between different factors, groups, if ratios is not well.

[ikalugin]

"Chinese hordes" in Russian Far East is largerly a myth.
But the de-population problem is real and is a problem for political (sovereighnity over land) and practical (key industries) reasons.

There is some limited work related migration, but on temporary (tour) basis, the northern parts of China are also being de-populated due to the much the same reasons (old infrastructure, employement problems, climate).


Within the speach (it was towards the end) the really spicy bits were about the reform itself - for example Putin proposed banning people who ever had dual citizenship or foreighn residency from running, to ban people who resided (without residence permit) permanently abroad for 25 years from running. This may affect opposition members as many of they studied or recieved training abroad and/or have residence permits, dual citizenship.


p.s. seems that the translation is not yet complete, it may take a while I guess.
http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/62582
full version but in Russian

[Rockstar]

So let me get this straight the entire cabinet is resigning in accordance with Article 117 of the Russian constitution. Which in essence gives Putin absolute power?
“In this context, it is obvious that, as the government, we must provide the president with a capability to make all decisions,” - Medvedev


Wouldnt that be like the U.S. House and Senate resigning so the President can make all the decisions?

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

So let me get this straight the entire cabinet is resigning in accordance with Article 117 of the Russian constitution. Which in essence gives Putin absolute power?
“In this context, it is obvious that, as the government, we must provide the president with a capability to make all decisions,” - Medvedev

https://www.consultant.ru/document/c...107a505f5ee32/

1. Правительство Российской Федерации может подать в отставку, которая принимается или отклоняется Президентом Российской Федерации.

No, it is just that Head of Government (Prime Minister) can submit resignation to President (Head of State) under article 117 part 1.

In this case the reason behind resignation is probably lack of percieved ability of Medvedev and his cabinet to enact the complex reform being discussed. Because Medvedev is a part of the inner circle he is being rotated to another, largerly advisory, role.

In Russian system Government is the body to enact President's decisions (they impliment them), they are not checks on his power (that is the mission of legislative and judicial branches) and do not set broad policy. So this is more like the whole bunch of secretaries resigning because they do not feel confident to be able to enact the big reform.

[Onkel Neal]

Basically Putin is setting things up so he can retain the same power when he becomes PM again or if he decides to lead the new State Council. He has never been a "President", and Medvedev is doing as he is told, he knows he will be killed if he opposes Putin.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Basically Putin is setting things up so he can retain the same power when he becomes PM again or if he decides to lead the new State Council. He has never been a "President", and Medvedev is doing as he is told, he knows he will be killed if he opposes Putin.

I think Putin is de-facto retiring and not moving around as you would seem to imply. So doing the same thing Yeltsin did in one speech ("I am tired I am leaving") but in a more graceful and gradual way. Another example of a similar transition would be what Kazahstan is doing now. The whole "you would get killed if you oppose" is being over dramatic (and ignorant of specifics of Medvedev's term, particularly at it's start, of relationships within the state).

The key here is distribution rather than movement of power - the reform ensures that there is no seat within the state where it concentrates like it does currently with Presidency. This is done by moving significant powers of President, such as appointing PM and cabinet from President to Parliament, as well as other similar changes.

Moreover under those reforms Putin can no longer hold Presidential office (even with it's powers significantly decreased and moved to Parliament) and Medvedev can hold one term.

[Catfish]

We will see.. at worst nothing will change. As i said before, always read between the lines, and do not put too much trust in speeches.

The international press does not see it as a retreat:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-r...-idUSKBN1ZE15J

[ikalugin]

The reform has been discussed for over a decade now, because post 1993 super presidential republic that Yeltsin built as the result of 1993 constitutional crisis and that Putin modified for hands on management style is not sustainable in the long term.

Back in 2007 there was a plan to get the younger generation Gorbachev style and enact big reforms, but due to economic crisis, protests and geopolitical tensions only the military and later pension reforms were enacted, the rest were postponed till better times (which do not seem to be happening) and Putin got back to micromanage the situation again.

Now with no real solution perceivable in short term that Putin actually works with (he solves problems as they come - hence hands on management style) and 2024 retirement (even under current rules Putin can’t run in 2024) pending the time is pressing, so the whole bunch of things that there is an internal consensus on (note for example who worked on so called Kudrin’s plan/strategy) because if he doesn’t pass them now and create a safe/stable system that does not depend on a single individual both Russia and himself, his circle, would be in trouble.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

I think Putin is de-facto retiring and not moving around as you would seem to imply. So doing the same thing Yeltsin did in one speech ("I am tired I am leaving") but in a more graceful and gradual way. Another example of a similar transition would be what Kazahstan is doing now. The whole "you would get killed if you oppose" is being over dramatic (and ignorant of specifics of Medvedev's term, particularly at it's start, of relationships within the state).

The key here is distribution rather than movement of power - the reform ensures that there is no seat within the state where it concentrates like it does currently with Presidency. This is done by moving significant powers of President, such as appointing PM and cabinet from President to Parliament, as well as other similar changes.

Moreover under those reforms Putin can no longer hold Presidential office (even with it's powers significantly decreased and moved to Parliament) and Medvedev can hold one term.

Possibly. But in any democratic government, there is competition between politicians at the top. In Russia's govt, no one disturbs the master, no one challenges him too effectively, or there are consequences.

In the 1990s, Nemtsov was a political star of post-Soviet Russia's "young reformers." He became deputy prime minister and was, for a while, seen as possible presidential material - but it was Putin who succeeded former president Boris Yeltsin in 2000. Nemtsov publicly supported the choice, but he grew increasingly critical as Putin rolled back civil liberties and was eventually pushed to the margins of Russian political life. Nemstov led massive street rallies in protest of the 2011 parliamentary election results and wrote reports on official corruption. He also was arrested several times as the Kremlin cracked down on opposition rallies. In Feb. 2015, just hours after urging the public to join a march against Russia's military involvement in Ukraine, Nemtsov was shot four times in the back by an unknown assailant within view of the Kremlin. Putin took "personal control" of the investigation into Nemtsov's murder, but the killer remains at large.

[ikalugin]

In a way, in many cases there is not real competition for the Head of State, for example in UK. And there is plenty of competition for the posts below that in Russia, as you can see with rotation of members of Government, presidential admin and so on.

As to Nemtsov - it was an action of a rogue actor and at the time Nemtsov possessed no threat to the established power. In fact he relied on support from Putin&co to get into the public office due to his own poor electability.

And people like Navalny (and others) are still alive if with criminal convictions that would preclude them from running in 2024, which they wisely got under the advise of their political consultants, as this would absolve them from any responsibility while generating martyrdom status and thus unaccountable funding (that say Navalny spends on lavish vacations instead of legal help for his supporters).