The disturbing future of 2024

On May 7, 2018, Vladimir Putin took the oath of office as Russia’s President. In his inauguration speech, he pointed out that “the country’s security and defense capability are reliably assured.... But now, we must use all the opportunities available to us primarily to address the most vital domestic development objectives, to achieve an economic and technological breakthrough, and to enhance competitiveness in the spheres that determine the future. A new quality of life, wellbeing, security and health are what constitutes our main goals and the focus of our policies” ¹ .

The first step the President took toward the implementation of this strategic goal was his signing another May Decree “On the national goals and strategic objectives in the development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2024”, which officially confirmed the key targets he spoke of in his Address to the Federal Assembly on March 1, 2018. We should note that “a twofold poverty reduction”, “Russia’s joining the five major world economies”, “raising life expectancy to 78 years (to 80 years by 2030)” and other tasks of the May 2018 Decree ² were fully consistent with the President’s political rhetoric, with the expectations of general population and with the forecasts of experts who were counting on the fact that after the inauguration “the topic of breakthrough which was mentioned in the Presidential Address will acquire new qualities and will be unfolded in concrete tasks” ³ .

From this point of view, the May Decrees occupy a special place among all other legislative documents, because they reflect the essence of campaign promises of the national leader. The progress with which the May Decrees – the documents containing key strategic areas of work for the nearest presidential term – are executed reflects the effectiveness of the entire system of public administration. All the more so since the very formulation of the right goals is not worth much without their consistent and systematic implementation.

“The breakthrough agenda” has indeed been “unfolded in concrete tasks”, however, it was done contrary to the opinion of many experts who believe that “when one wants to make reforms, one finds and brings new people. Making reforms with people who haven’t made any progress in it for many years is an idea that is doomed to failure” ⁴ . The second step that the President made on the way toward mobilization development of Russia was to nominate Dmitry Medvedev for the position of Prime Minister. In fact, this meant that no significant changes were expected in the Cabinet of Ministers. And this, in turn, can only mean that during the fourth presidential term the “capitalism for the few” will continue to dominate Russia’s public administration system . ⁵

There has been some reshuffling in the composition of the Russian government, but it was not reduced essentially to getting rid of useless players and hiring new ones (although, it was done, too); rather it was all about trading places inside the cabinet of ministers. All this picturesque game of swapping places and offices in the White House looks like an illustration to Krylov’s famous fable “Quartet” with its moral: “And you, my friends, no matter your positions, will never be musicians!” And yet… ⁵

Some experts note that “it is quite difficult to describe the prospects of the new government, since the team under Medvedev has not been

Expert opinions:

• 1.    Despite the fact that the Cabinet now contains quite a few new people, a new government of Dmitry Medvedev surprisingly or, on the contrary, not surprisingly resembles the old government of Dmitry Medvedev. What we got is a retouched, refreshed, repainted and lacquered, freed of ballast, but still the same familiar “political product” ⁶ .

• 2.    No miracle happened. Dmitry Medvedev is Prime Minister again. We can already see a large lobbying group, the main beneficiaries of which are Chemezov, the Kovalchuks, the Rotenbergs, and Sobyanin. As a new May Decree is elaborated, we shall see smaller players, too ⁷ .

• 3.    Few people paid attention to the fact that at the inauguration a wonderful image emerged – a picture of “the empty corridors of power. Let us recall how the President was walking down the hallways, and they were empty. The same thing is with the government: the deck is shuffled, but nothing really changes... It is obvious that the new power is absolutely empty from the point of view of new people and new ideas. Therefore, to put it mildly, it is futile to have any great expectations in this regard... ⁸

• 4.    If the country is preparing a radical change in economic and domestic policy in general, then it all starts with the appointment of a new prime minister. As for now, there are no changes: everything is done to maintain a passive work aimed only at maintaining the current life of the state ⁹ .

formed from the standpoint of some political logic and strategy , when there is a goal, for example, to create a liberal or a conservative government. The current appointments will mean another balancing of different political groups of influence ... In fact, each case of reshuffle should be considered on the basis of interpersonal relations. Each of the expected deputy prime ministers is somehow related to one of the financial groups” ⁶¹⁰ .

Can we say that the appointment of Dmitry Medvedev was a logical step taken by the President in order to achieve ambitious strategic guidelines in the next six years? During his official speeches at the end of the third and beginning of the fourth presidential term, Vladimir Putin dwelled upon the work of the Government many times, and the general keynote of his assessment was: “We haven’t managed to achieve everything we planned, but in general the result is positive”.

Indeed, if we compare the international situation and the level of socio-economic development in modern Russia and that in the 1990s or early 2000s, the progress is obvious; and from this point of view, the nomination of Dmitry Medvedev is a quite consistent and justified step. However, internal and external global challenges urge us to move forward and stop clinging to the past that was 10–20 years ago . After all, we have to acknowledge that Russia desperately needs breakthrough development and not just progressive and evolutionary development. The need emerged only because Russia has reached critical limits in lagging behind developed countries. To see the point, let us just look at the latest data of the Global Competitiveness Index. Although for the period from 2012 to 2018, Russia rose from 66th to 38th position in the rating, it is still not even among the top 20, but among countries such as Indonesia, Malta, Poland and India. At the same time, according to the criterion of “innovative potential” (without which it is impossible to count on a breakthrough development in the near future), Russia has

We have done a lot to implement the 2012 May executive orders. I must say that there were several failures, but overall, despite the demanding targets of these orders, without them we would not have had the results we can see today ⁶ .

The Government was guided in its work by the May 2012 executive orders. Yes, there were challenges in this area, and not all indicators were achieved in full. This is inevitable when you engage on a large-scale and long-term project. But the situation was constantly changing, creating new objective factors. Let me reiterate that we do see tangible results and momentum. Change is underway. We have set the strategic development vector on the right path ⁷ .

been and remains far behind the G8 countries, behind China and India, and is on the list next to Tajikistan, Guinea, ¹¹¹² Thailand and Senegal ¹³ ( Insert 1 ). As the President said in his Address to the Federal Assembly, “the main threat and our main enemy is the fact that we are falling behind. If we are unable to reverse this trend, we will fall even further behind”.

The goals of achieving breakthrough development and catching up with major participants of geopolitical competition were announced by the President in his Address to the Federal Assembly on March 1, 2018 and were supported by the wider public, which ensured Putin’s landslide victory in the presidential election. Society and government formed new provisions of the social contract focused on critical internal issues related to the dynamics of the standard of living and quality of life, performance of the means of social mobility, finding effective solutions to social problems, etc.

• N. Starikov points out: “Any state always rests on a certain social contract, in each society there is a consensus on the basis of which its further development is formed. If there is no social contract, if there is no such consensus, then society becomes unstable, and the state may cease to exist” ¹⁴ .

However, as historical experience shows, each new social contract is accompanied not only by new goals and objectives, but also by new ideas and mechanisms for their implementation, and therefore – by new persons in the ruling elite who implement their own vision of the future. Thus, a specific social contract existed in our country after the collapse of the Russian Empire when the Bolsheviks came to power. Another social contract that was completely different from the one mentioned above existed after the victory in the Great Patriotic War; the contract was based on patriotic sentiments and on the awareness of the need to restore the country that lay in ruins at the time.

Despite the betrayal of the national elites and undoubted involvement of Western nations, the collapse of the Soviet Union was also partly an unspoken social contract, because it would not have taken place if society had not have a need for a more free and diverse life, the bits and pieces of which came from the West. Just as the elimination of comprehensive negative consequences of the 1990s formed a basis of a tacit consensus between society and government and provided unconditional support for tough and decisive actions taken by V. Putin to restore order in the system of public administration, to recover the economy and raise the standard of living, and pursue independent foreign policy.

Thus, not all of these social agreements had positive consequences in the history of Russia, but each of them was carried out by different people in power and brought something new, first of all, to Russia’s ideological development. And from

Insert 1

15	о 04		04 04	о 04	oh	04	04	04	04	04	40 04	9	CO ОГ
.s 75	04	$	о	о	те	о	те	04	04	со	9	co	40 m
5	04	со	^	40		S	S	04		те	2	г	40 40
сЗ Е и	5	^	о	04	ОО	9	40	ОО		04	m	04 04	40 04
о о сз ь	04 04	оь	5	40	о 04	ОО	S	ОО	СО	I-	^	^	00
су 75 сЗ ti сЗ и	oh		04	40	04	04	on	со	40	^	04		04
е сЗ	9	on	со	04	04	ОО	04	04	04	oh		oh	04
	9	04	те	2	40	04	Г-	О 04	те	40	те	co	О
g о 0	о 04	04	О	04	Г-	40 04	3	04		on	oh	i-	40
	oh	со	о 04	9	со	04	oh	04 04	о 04		О	un	m
2 о о о £	5	о 5	о ё о о о о о о о сЗ	.2 5 о Б* Л •с 75 сЗ 5 о Е	н е е 75 сЗ .2 о 75 О 00	.2 'о о £ Е ’О о о 0	.2 'о о £ 2 о 3	ё о о 75 S 'о л е Е	75 о о	s	.2 .2 E m	.2 о	5 75 О $ © О 3

In 2012, Russia ranked 66th among 142 countries – its closest neighbors in the rating were Latvia, Vietnam, Peru, and Colombia.

Among the analyzed countries (G8 + India and China), Russia ranked last in the five of the twelve main pillars of competitiveness: “Institutions” (127th in the world), “Goods market efficiency” (128th), “Financial market development” (127th), “Business sophistication” (114th) and “Innovation”

(71th).

Insert 1 (continuing)

04

cn

40 04

^Г

о 40

40

40 СЧ

сч

9

,cd E e

04

40 40

О

04

04

40

04

9

О

сп

04

04 сч

о

.S

s

m

04

%

pi

о

о 40

о

О 40

40

Е

04

ОО

cd E и

'd-

40

^

о

9

40

ОО

ОО

СП

'—1

сп

Ь

m

Г-

40

сч сч

40

40

сп

сч

ОО

40

^

cd 75 cd cd и

04

40

9

ОО

сп

ОО

Г^

г^

40

9

cd

^

’d'

04

г-

Я

сп

сч сч

о сч

’d-

сп

ОО

04

(N

40

^

о сч

О

40

СП

’d-

г^

г^

сч

ОО

0

(N

О

(N

m

04

^

сч

ОО

04

04

04

04

(Z) CD

О (N

04

5

04 сч

сп

г^

сп

сч

40

сч

сч

сч

сч

о и о cd Е

5

2 s g cd

E e о e Q E О e о О о

.2 о 75 О & cd Е •с 75 cd ^ Е О Е

е 75 cd .2 "cd О 75 О Л 00 £

.2 Е о cd -о о a

.2 Е о cd S о ►3

Е о 75 -^ cd S cd .Е Е

.Е Е cd 2 о

cd S

.2 .о Е о .Е m

.2 о

X 75 е Е о и б

behind the key participants of geopolitical competition: the U.S. (2nd place in the world), Germany (5th), the UK (8th), Japan (9th), China (27th). Russia’s closest neighbors in the rating are Indonesia, Malta, Poland and India.

Among the analyzed countries (G8 + India and China), Russia ranks last in the three out of twelve criteria: “Goods market efficiency” (80th in the world); “Business sophistication” (71st)”, “Innovation” (49th). And according to the last indicator Russia is close to such countries as Tajikistan,

Guinea, Thailand and Senegal.

this point of view, taking into consideration ambitious plans for the next six years, it is difficult to expect that the Government with its virtually unchanged composition will allow the country to take a new step in its development.

The dynamics of statistical indicators and the data of public opinion polls during V. Putin’s third presidential term clearly show that the mechanisms that worked 15–20 years ago do not work today. Instead, we hear more and more about corruption scandals and tragic events that claim the lives of hundreds of Russians because of the negligence and irresponsibility of officials at all levels of government. In other words, if we recall the aphorism of a great Russian writer who said that Russia had always suffered from two evils: fools and bad roads, then in modern realities we can safely add two more: “absolute ineffectiveness” and “absolute lack of responsibility” ¹⁵ .

Besides, quite a few facts remain “behind the scenes”. In particular, we speak about the activities of major state-owned corporations that control most of the national wealth. Here we can mention the case of Aleksandr Fek, whom experts call “the best Russian oil and gas analyst in the ratings of 2015–2016” ¹⁶ and who was fired for his reports on the performance of Rosneft and Gazprom” ¹⁷ .

On May 8, speaking at the plenary session of the State Duma, Vladimir Putin noted that in order to execute the May 2018 Decrees it will be necessary to allocate “at least eight trillion rubles” for these purposes. The President mentioned that

“it’s not just talk and words, we have calculated everything. I don’t know how the government will manage this in the course of practical implementation of what we plan to do, I hope that everything will turn out the way we plan , but in general it should be a systematic and structured work” ¹⁸ .

The current situation, when the prime minister is the leader of a party whose faction in the State Duma has a constitutional majority, is, in our view, a violation of the principle of the separation of powers, because it actually allows the prime minister to control one of the chambers of the Federal Assembly ²¹ .

Even after the Kremlin Report was issued, experts and political scientists expressed the view that by expanding the list Washington is trying to influence the Russian elite, to provoke its split, to force those who are interested in good relations with the West to oppose the Kremlin openly. The April sanctions fit in this logic: big business, which is losing a lot of money, should think about whether it is worth moving further alongside the Kremlin policy... The sanctions against big business affect citizens in any case. Entrepreneurs from the American list are large taxpayers, investors and job creator ²² .

The main reason why the Cabinet of Ministers has failed 212“to achieve all indicators of May 2012 Decrees in full”23 is the pressure of the West (after the United Russia party headed by the Prime Minister (!), has received a constitutional majority in the State Duma, it makes no sense complaining about differences in opinions and political debates). However, even in 2018–2024, it is futile to hope that our relations with the West are going to improve. Moreover, if in 2012–2018 this pressure was concentrated mainly on political aspects (which was successfully converted into consolidation and patriotic sentiments), then in 2018 it takes a new form: on the background of information attacks (the Skripal case, an alleged chemical attack in the Syrian city of Douma) the next package of economic sanctions has been prepared, and according to many experts it is “the largest one since 2014”. The new sanctions will certainly affect the general population, but they are aimed not at society, but primarily at the economic elite, that is, those people who have their own and quite specific interests and who (unlike the general population) are not “susceptible” to any patriotic rhetoric.

“The West is driving toward a total war, at any cost, without any rules, since it cannot win any regular war against Russia, as history has proven many times before... And what about us? We see everything differently, in no hurry, within the regulatory legal space, in a completely different rhythm, in our own historical cycles... We are preparing for V. Putin’s next six-year presidency, the last in a row, because (and this is a fundamental moment in the observance of the law) we have everything in accordance with the law, as spelled out in the Constitution, which, contrary to all logic and despite its colonial format, is firm and absolute. But it is the very fact that the coming six-year term will be the last makes the whole situation utterly dramatic, because it will unfold in a cascade of increasing external challenges and, ultimately, total war…” ²⁴

Thus, as for the main factor hindering the implementation of the May 2012 Decrees, the situation has not changed and has become even worse. Moreover, the task of ensuring that the results of execution of the May Decrees are tangible for the general public (and not only for the reporting indicators of the Government) has been and remains relevant. But the timeline has changed. Now the effect should be seen not in six years, but in a year or two. Otherwise, the trust in the government can decline dramatically, and the trust in the President can also decrease, and it is the foundation of legitimacy of the authorities as a whole (the trust in the Government and in regional authorities is much lower than the trust in the President).

If Putin could legally continue to be President after 2024, he would be a political beneficiary of socio-economic investment, and the government would only be a tool in such a case. Such was the situation concerning the May 2012 Decrees. Putin put forward the idea of increasing social spending during his presidential campaign and scored points on this. The Government, in turn, did not fully cope with the implementation of the decrees, it was criticized, and its rating was much lower than that of the President.

Now the ruling elite cannot be content with this option anymore. First, the Decree “On national goals” must be implemented. Second, the positive public effect of this work cannot be postponed; it should be manifested at least within the next electoral cycle. Third, there must be someone else, in addition to Vladimir Putin, whose political weight will increase due to the implementation of the new socio-economic policy ²⁵ .

In the new Government, the composition of which was supported by the State Duma and approved by the President on May 15, 2018, the majority of experts note only two quite noticeable changes: the Ministry of Education and Science was divided, and the “Siluanov–Kudrin” tier was strengthened due to the fact that the former took the post of deputy prime minister, and the latter became head of the Accounts Chamber. ²⁵ And while there are currently different assessments regarding the first of these changes, the opinions of experts regarding the strengthening of the Government’s financial bloc are quite clear: this will make it possible to manipulate the statistics on a greater scale, bringing the economic indicators in line with the necessary reporting, rather than serving the interests of the majority of people.

“The post-election government will become the cabinet of one finance minister, who will also become the first deputy prime minister. This configuration does not imply an alternative view on budget policy” ²⁶ . Therefore, Tatyana Golikova,

A powerful political tier “Siluanov–Kudrin” (or Kudrin–Siluanov) has been formed and has come to the fore in the Russian “power vertical”. Now their influence becomes almost dominant, because together they can “scan” any ministry and department, up to the intelligence service and the army, not to mention the lower structures. The balance of priorities of the Russian “power vertical” and, as a result, the balance of power within it, is clearly shifting toward financial transactions ²⁷ .

Expert opinions ²⁸ :

• 1.    In general, we can agree that in the work of the government there is less economy and more accounting.

• 2.    The new government ceases to be a place to formulate strategies and implement its own policy. It turns into a group of executors whose main task is to choose the right method for calculating statistical indicators to execute the May Decree and fulfil the expectations of the President.

• 3.    Most of the tasks are performed simply by changing calculation methods. It is easy to come up with a set of criteria to get Russia into the “top ten countries with the highest quality of general education” (even if such a rating will not be recognized by anyone except the Kremlin). “Elimination of personnel shortage in medical organizations” is achieved by significantly reducing the standard time spent on one patient and by increase the standard number of hospital beds per doctor.

who previously criticized many departments when being head of the Accounts Chamber, has been replaced by Aleksey Kudrin. ²⁷⁸²⁹ “The government has not been completely formed yet, but it is already possible to speak about the strengthening of the role of the financial bloc and preservation of the current situation... De facto, the task of such a Cabinet will not be to ensure a breakthrough, but to ensure the life of the state. The breakthrough can then be simply “designed” in the reports” ²⁹ .

Russia’s major “discussion” platforms that look more like “invitation-only parties” as always provide a telling example in this regard. For instance, in 2017, at the Gaidar Forum, no permission to deliver a report was given to Boris Titov, Presidential Commissioner for Entrepreneurs’ Rights and a presidential candidate, who has his own view and a specific program of action for the development of the Russian economy (“Growth strategy”).

Similar situation was observed in 2018 at the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum, where “people with alternative views were not invited” ³⁰ . Moreover, the very topics discussed at SPIEF–2018 resembled “a distraction call, and masking factor” ³¹ . Deoffshorization and long-term economic planning, the policy of the Central Bank, enhancement of production efficiency and other “conceptual strategic issues are simply not discussed, they are viewed as taboo” ³² .

No less remarkable conclusions can be made if we analyze the “Direct Line” with the President, which took place on June 7, 2018.

First, we should mention the words which Kirill Kleymenov, one of the moderators, said at the beginning of the program: “Some of the issues come up year after year. They include healthcare, housing and, of course, wages and pensions. Frankly speaking, we do not really want this Direct Line to become a book of complaints” ³³ . Meanwhile, most of the “questions” that people asked were not questions as such. Most often they were complaints and even “cries for help”, ending with phrases such as “We ask for your help and assistance in this problem”, “Still nothing has been built, although it was to be commissioned a year and a half ago.

And we want to live. Help us”, “We rely on your help very much”, “Vladimir Vladimirovich, help, please, do not let the school be closed” and so on ³⁴ .

Some excerpts from the President’s answers to the questions asked during the “Direct Line” ¹³ :

– “What is happening now is unacceptable, it is wrong…”;

– “We definitely need to appoint the persons responsible…”;

– “We will check it again, although we have returned to this topic many times…”;

– “Yes, you are certainly right, and I also spoke about it, it is one of the very acute and sensitive problems…”;

– “I’m even embarrassed to hear that there is still a problem, say, with employment. We have addressed this issue many times…”;

– “ All this needs to be addressed. I once again say it to the minister of internal affairs and to the heads of the migration service... I will try to make sure that in your case the problem is solved. But it is still a large-scale issue…”;

– “I take your question as an opportunity to draw the attention of heads of Russian regions to this problem once again. We will discuss it at one of the next State Council sessions. And I will ask the Administration and the Government of the Russian Federation, the relevant Ministers to analyze the situation and tell me in the near future about what is happening…”;

– “The problem is generally clear. This is not the only case of this kind”, etc.

Second, having considered the answers of the President, we can say once again that local officials fail to execute his orders. Vladimir Putin speaks about it constantly, but if the system as a whole is not working, then we can assume that only those who managed to reach the President directly, during the phone-in session, could hope they would get actual help, i.e. 79 questions out of 2.7 million can be dealt with. ³⁵

The above facts provide an explanation for the pessimistic forecasts of experts who say that the ambitious plans for a “decisive breakthrough” in Russia’s domestic socio-economic development

March 1, 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered his annual Address to the Federal Assembly of Russia. In your opinion, how realistic are the tasks that the President announced in his Address, and will they be fulfilled or not? (closed-ended question, one answer, percentage of those who listened to the Address or learned its content from the news)

Answer	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2018
The President set specific, real tasks and, most likely, they will be fulfilled as soon as possible	28	31	31	36	29	49	34
The President set specific, real tasks, but they will not be fulfilled due to corruption and bureaucracy in the government	49	47	40	42	46	31	47
The President’s tasks are too general, not specific, and cannot be implemented	11	12	17	16	20	8	6
It is difficult to answer	12	10	12	6	5	12	13

will never get off the ground. “ Many doubt that the goals contained in the new document are feasible . For example, the goals to increase life expectancy are questionable. By the end of 2017, life expectancy in the country was 72 years. According to Rosstat forecasts, by 2024, life expectancy in Russia will be 76.7 years at best and 73.3 years at worst. The goal of “joining the top five world economies” looks ambitious” too... The only question is how and by what means the government is going to achieve all the goals declared” ³⁶ .

According to VTsIOM studies, Russians do not really believe that the goals set out by V. Putin in his Address to the Federal Assembly will be achieved: 47% of people (almost every second citizen of Russia) are sure that this will be impeded by corruption and bureaucracy in the government ³⁷ .

According to the data of the Federal Research Sociological Center of RAS, Russians think that the most achievable goals among those mentioned in the Address are “strengthening the country’s defense” (59%) and “ensuring a breakthrough in the field of science and high technology” (38%), but these tasks are not among the most critical ones for society (Insert 2).

According to surveys, the most urgent tasks for society are “increase in real income” (98%), “affordable and quality medical care” (98%), “repairing regional and local roads” (98%), “increase in pension payments and their indexation above the rate of inflation” (96%). All of them are among the goals set out by the President – the goals that, according to the opinion of Russians, will not be achieved (this is noted by 37–40% of people).

On March 21, at an enlarged meeting of the Public Council of the Federal project “Growth Locomotives”, the United Russia party and representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences discussed how to implement the task set by V. Putin to ensure Russia’s leadership in the new technological cycle. Boris Gryzlov noted that “Russia has everything necessary to catch up with other countries in terms of technological development and settle this critical issue. There are the goals formulated by the head of state and supported by the majority of citizens. There are the resources, both natural and geographical, and other advantages such as the history of our state and creative and scientific potential of our people. There are also those advanced, unparalleled achievements, which the President spoke about in the second part of his Address”38… However, this list of items mentioned by the Chairman of the Supreme Council of United Russia (we recall it is the ruling party with a constitutional majority in the State Duma), unfortunately, does not contain the quality of public administration – the major system-forming factor, without which all the competitive advantages of the country are not able to give the expected result. And this is clearly confirmed by RAS President A.M. Sergeev, who drew attention to the barriers that prevent science from “finally becoming a productive force in our economy”: “resource orientation of the economy”, the obsolete material base of science, “the valley of death” lying between fundamental and applied science, between science and business, etc. All this, by and large, results from inefficient administration, which (judging by the composition of the “new” Government) will continue in the next six years.

Thus, statistics data, expert assessments, public opinion research findings, and actual results of the execution of the May 2012 Decrees present quite a pessimistic picture concerning the execution of the May 2018 Decree and achievement of the goals set by the President and aimed at providing breakthrough development of Russia and bridging the gap with the developed countries on most key aspects of life and, above all, on those aspects that are most in demand by society. After all, the May Decrees are just the tip of the iceberg. In fact, when the system fails, the consequences of the failure are manifested in various aspects of social, political and economic life: from bribery to an inefficient course of economic development; from the closure of schools and hospitals in some village to the lingering gap between Russia and the most developed countries in terms of innovative development potential.

Certain “optimism” can be inspired by a sarcastic comment of A.M. Makarov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Budget and Taxes, as he noted, apparently, “with full knowledge of the facts” that “the main task for the implementation of the President’s Decree is solved. We have placed Rosstat under the control of the Ministry of Economic Development”39.

“Under the current Russian government, there are simply no resources to provide for the responses to the existing and external challenges. There simply could not be any meaningful answer, because it contradicts the very essence of the current superficial and lightweight government, easily squandering away what it has inherited – the inheritance it has not created, the inheritance which is semantic, ideological, and philosophical, in the first place. While playing dangerous games in the “turbulent” 1990s, living lavishly in the “fat” 2000s, and recovering from the hangover in the crisis-ridden 2010s, the current elites have left us without a future. They have simply blown it, squandered it, dissipated it, exported it to offshore territories. And if any trouble emerged, they sheltered themselves behind Him . Yes, he was covering up for them, so he did not have time to do anything for the future, and he became a substitute for a meaningful response to the challenge of the time. No future. There’s only the present, six more years without a next term” ⁴⁰ .

The new Government does not have new people who are able to bring forward some bright and unconventional ideas and then ensure their implementation. The potential of its members is well known. However, all this is not of great importance. By and large, little depends on the Government. It is only a technical body. The main parameters of the system are determined by the President, and he also makes key decisions ⁴¹ .

Insert 2

42 Filina O. A bird in the hand turned into two in the bush: what Russians think about the feasibility of strategic tasks of the state. Kommersant Newspaper, 2018, May 28. Available at:

Insert 2 (continuing)

75 й .о о cd о о 'й и о cd "cd ,Й 'cd о 00 о Пи £	40	’d-	04	со	m	m	40	О'	m	04
	cd о о Пи и й cd о а х о ей 00 cd 00 'cd	О ’cd О 75 Й cd ’cd Й 'оо 'cd 04	cd й cd г .й и о й в 75 О "cd й и	о й .2 "cd Й О 3 й .2 "cd X 75 'В .3 О а й .2 Й а .3 'cd	й .2 cd а а S1 'о о .й й J? Qi	Й cd О 'cd 'В ’cd .00 2 75 й cd О ё cd "cd й и 40	о о ’cd й .2 "cd 5 ’cd 00 .Й ’О	й о cd о 3 '5 00 и О 3 ■о .h 73 У cd 00 о 75 О Е 'Е 00 н-1 о оо "5	0 о о о .й cd 75 .Й S 3 1 £ 04	о о о о .й Й cd .й С^ о
Cd 40 о Й о .й 75 й .о о cd й cd о .Й й 75 Й О а 'cd О 00 о а £	04	со	?	04		04	04	40 04	04	04
	£ й 00 'В 75 О S 75 Й cd 00 Й 'Ви О й 75 <5 75 'си О И У 00 1 о 00 р у g Й<	.00 2 75 Й cd <5 й .о 'В о 75 .й 00 о cd 04 ^	.О ‘cd1 о $ о о В си § 1 5 О 75 S " 00 3 ,О си ^5 со о	о о о о 3 00 cd оо 'й	.й 75 "О 75 Й cd 'cd 'о ? о оо й cd .00	Й .2 cd а о а S1 'о о ’cd й X 'cd 40	О В й .2 "cd .Й о й .2 X 75 'В X cd .2 а X cd Й й	.2 о о 'cd й "cd 75 О 'cd <5 00 Й й Щ	Й .2 cd а о а "cd о о оо о й о о оо й й Щ 04	Е S° и §• Д cd О 75 75 О о О Й о .2 О и cd И а 5 ,Й й 2° 00 Щ й

S.M. Shishkin: “... besides the state and the army, there are people in Russia, the people who vote for you, Vladimir Vladimirovich. You forgot about them. It is necessary to revive the economy, to make a breakthrough in the economy, and not on paper, but in practice. This requires a program and first of all, personnel. It is not easy to do it, but it is necessary to do it, otherwise all your reforms will be in vain. The government you approved is not for the people. Vladimir Vladimirovich, it is not the government that the people told you about during the election period. Putin is a strong President, but right now we need a leader. The ruling elite must be purged, and only the leader can do it. Can Putin be the leader? He can be. In some cases, he is already the leader. People will help him. But there is no time to be lost” ⁴³ .

A. Karavaev (Saint Petersburg): “Please tell us how long will the growth in fuel prices continue? Forty-five rubles per liter of diesel fuel – how much can it be tolerated? We can’t bear it anymore, stop it somehow. We made such an important choice on March 18, the whole country voted for you, and you can’t stop the price of gasoline from going up…” ⁴⁴

An excerpt from an open letter to the President from the Board of “Kizvizvech” – the Kamchatka Krai Union of ancestral and family fishing communities of the indigenous minorities of the North, Siberia and the Far East: “Vladimir Vladimirovich, we voted for you. And we want to show you in percentage terms why Russians, including Kamchatka, voted for you::

• •    20% of votes were cast for your achievements in the military-industrial complex, strengthening the army and protecting Russia’s external sovereignty;

• •    40% of votes cast for you signify our belief that you will change the government completely, and therefore, you will change the approach to national development, in which the officials will no longer treat hard workers and honest businessmen as trash;

• •    40% of votes were cast for you, because we want to believe that you and your team will restore the law that will not only put thieves in jail, but also confiscate all their property and the property of their close relatives, which has been acquired illegally. Then there will be no more such terrible fires as in Kemerovo, asphalt paving will not be done in the rain, and building a stadium will not cost like building an entire city. Russia’s GDP will grow overnight by an average of 40% of its present value, and the annual economic growth rate will be ahead of that in China. And most importantly, there will be no destitute people in Russia ⁴⁵ .

Many experts (including Yu. Boldyrev and M. Delyagin), when speaking about the key problems and the future of Russia, have pointed out many times that everything is in the hands of the President and the Federal Assembly; they can form a Government that will be able to execute orders and achieve specific indicators contained in the relevant decrees and strategic documents, and to do it effectively, completely and unconditionally.

Therefore, today experts more and more often say (and unfortunately, they often have good reason to say so) that “in May 2018, Vladimir Putin got the very Government he wanted to get”46 and “the technical government has received a completely technical May Decree in the form of extremely vague strategic goals”47. In 2012– 2018, the Government acquired the experience in “implementing” the May Decrees by simply changing calculation techniques, and there is every reason to believe this experience will be reproduced during V. Putin’s fourth presidential term... The question is when the society will address the issues of public administration inefficiency and the absence of tangible positive dynamics of the quality of life not to the Prime Minister, but to the President?

And, apparently, this is already happening…