Tandemology

The political temperature has definitely been going up in Moscow lately and with it the level of uncertainty, but I am still not convinced about the above hypothesis as I believe the tandem leadership remains united. They simply need each other and seeming divisions can often be explained by the fact that they target different audiences and/or want to create an illusion of real competition. The current issue is illustrative. Medvedev authorised the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to not veto the UN resolution on Libya, a resolution Putin called a “medieval call for crusades”. Medvedev then rebuked Putin’s statement as unacceptable and said such words could “lead to a clash of civilisations.” We have heard similar seemingly contradictory statements from the duo before, for instance over WTO membership where Medvedev is positive while Putin argues for a customs union with Kazakhstan and Belarus (that is not consistent with WTO rules). 

Now, these kinds of statements should be analysed with the view that Medvedev is in charge of foreign relations and Putin handles domestic relations in mind. If Putin, who is still the most influential of the two, was truly against the resolution he could have pushed for a Russian veto. Apart from addressing different constituents, I believe they are quite happy to project a level of uncertainty (for the feuding elites domestically) and an impression of real political competition (for the foreign audience). But when the perception of these ulterior motives go too far, they make sure to display that they are, after all, united. The modus operandi is normally male bonding through eating, drinking or playing sports together. 

Any analysis of the Russian political leadership, including this one, should be taken with a large grain of salt though. Indeed, one of the problems with Russian politics is that the formal institutions are so weak and unpredictable that analysts are forced to rely on Kremlinology, or its contemporary art form Tandemology.