12 December, 2007: London, UK -- Monday saw Russian President Vladimir Putin anoint his first deputy prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, as his chosen successor. Whomever he supported is widely expected to win next year’s election and even leading competitors seem resigned to the inevitability. The decision is fodder for Kremlin tea-leaf readers who will be scrambling to discern what this move will mean for the Bear.

Medvedev ticks all the right boxes for Putin; he hails from St. Petersburg and has worked with the current president since the early 1990s. More recently, he ran Putin’s election campaign in 2000 and then had a stint as his chief of staff. Currently, he chairs the country’s gas monopoly, Gazprom, which has been at the center of Russia’s assertive ascendancy.

Analysts and Western governments have derided Putin for his autocratic tendencies, most flagrantly evident in this month’s parliamentary elections, and relations between the West and Russia have grown frosty, if not downright confrontational, over the past year. Yet, the person Putin has tapped to head-up the Kremlin—at least in name—has received positive reviews for his liberalism and pro-Western tendencies. One “senior Kremlin liberal” said: “The liberal wing supports him. He has the right kind of views on democracy, on freedom of the press, on the market.”

Undoubtedly, Putin will retain demonstrable influence; Medvedev has already offered his current boss the premiership—a move, according to the AP, that was “almost certainly made with prior consultation with the president (Putin).” But why pick someone who at first glance seems to take a different stance on important issues? Another leading candidate, Sergei Ivanov, has a stronger, anti-Western streak, which many claim Putin also has.

I would proffer three theories to understanding the decision. Firstly, someone so centrally involved in the current administration will at least be sympathetic to the anti-Western stances that have been taking over the past few years. “The world’s attitude toward Russia has been changed,” Medvedev stated in recent speech. “They don’t lecture us like schoolchildren. They respect us and they reckon with us. Russia has been returned to its overwhelming position in the world community. [Emphasis added]” The two men are likely more akin to each other than these initial reports let on.

Secondly, the Kremlin is a Byzantine institution with numerous factions. Putin has been adroit at balancing these groups against one another and bringing in his own supporters—often members of the intelligence service, the FSB, and its predecessor, the KGB. The current president does not want one clique to become too powerful and looks to have opted for the energy elite over the military one. How this plays out in the future is anyone’s guess.

The most interesting impetus might be, ironically, Putin’s commitment to democracy. He expounded his support for a “mature democracy,” even going so far as to claim: “I am a pure and absolute democrat. But you know what the problem is—not a problem, a real tragedy—that I am alone. There are no such pure democrats in the world.” A dubious claim given his antipathy for Russia’s political opposition. But could it be that Putin truly wants to be seen as a legitimate world leader accepted within Western circles? It looks to have played into his decision to not seek a third term in office. Could this desire also have influenced Putin when deciding to give Medvedev the nod? Possibly.

What other factors are at play? Send us your thoughts at: editors@diplomaticourier.org