In 2008, at the end of Putin’s first presidential cycle, he passed his post to then-Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev for four years. At the time, Putin took over as prime minister but continued to lead the country from the sidelines, in a set-up that became known as the “tandem.” However, at the end of the 2012 election everything had already returned to its place: Putin had been reelected president, and Medvedev was made the head of government as prime minister. In Russian politics, this maneuver is known as “castling” — an analogy with chess.

After the second coming of Putin, the presidential term in Russia was increased from four to six years, granting the head of state 12 years in power. During this time, the annexation of Crimea, the war with Ukraine and the ensuing Western sanctions, as well as Russia’s increased involvement in the Syrian Civil War, took place. The only thing that remained unchanged was Putin’s power. He quietly won all the country’s elections, leaving all rivals far, far behind. Technically speaking, there is some political opposition in the country, but none of the real opponents of the regime are allowed to engage in politics.

However, time is running out, and Putin will soon have to step down again formally as president. So, the time has come for the Kremlin to decide what power structures in Russia will remain after 2024. Journalists and political experts predicted various scenarios of the power transfer, such as the unification of Russia and Belarus to create a “Union State,” as well as some sort of new castling. However, everyone was sure of one thing:  Putin can’t simply retire. Too much power is concentrated in his hands to just leave it all behind.

Message to the Federal Assembly

The transfer of power began . The President’s annual address to the federal assembly was scheduled for January 15. The country expected that Putin would talk about the economic situation and social issues. Russians have been growing increasingly weary of hearing about war and geopolitics. The president, aware of the popular mood, began his speech by announcing an increase in child allowances, and support to teachers, doctors and young families. He even promised free lunches to schoolchildren.

However, the second part of his speech was entirely devoted to the redistribution of roles among the branches of power in the country. In fact, Putin proclaimed the beginning of constitutional reform.

The president’s statements provided a rough idea of how . The main idea is that Russia will remain a presidential system, but the role of the prime minister and government will be strengthened. The head of the government will be proposed by parliament — no longer by the president, as it is now, but the president will still be able to dismiss the appointee. The federation council will have the right to remove judges from office, and officials and judges will be forbidden to hold a second citizenship or residence permits in other countries. Only those who have lived in Russia for the last 25 years will be eligible for the presidency.

In addition, they must  never have held a residence permit of another country or a second citizenship. Putin also announced that Russia would no longer grant precedence to international conventions or court rulings over its own laws.

President Putin also spoke in favor of strengthening the role of governors and the federation council, which currently have rather nominal functions. He also suggested removing the term “consecutive” from the two-term limit on holding office. Putin recommended that all his ideas be enshrined in the constitution. In Russian political terms, a “recommendation” by Putin means direct orders.

The president concluded his speech on a dramatic note, saying that renewal and the change of power are an essential condition for progressive evolution of society and stable development. He preferred not to talk about his role in his imagined Russia of the future. However, one thing is clear: He has taken the necessary steps to secure his own political future in the country. Since he can no longer remain president, he needs another powerful position that will allow him to exercise the full extent of his power.

Government Resignation

No one can say whether Dmitry Medvedev knew that January 15 would be his last day as head of government. He and the entire Russian cabinet resigned only a few hours after Putin’s address.

The president proposed the candidacy of a new prime minister that same evening:  Mikhail Mishustin, the country’s chief tax collector. His name says nothing to the average man, as he only appeared on English Wikipedia after the new appointment. However, Mishustin is no novice in Russian politics. He is seen as a reformer, an expert in modern technology and a keeper of secrets for many Russian officials. The post of chief tax officer is a police post, with all its consequences.

Mishustin doesn’t have much popularity, but does he really need it in his new position of power? Prime ministers in Russia are usually the fall guys. They are responsible for all failures of the government in order to shift responsibility from the president, who is busy with geopolitics and global issues. Nevertheless, Russia’s parliament approved Mishstin’s appointment without much hesitation.

As for Medvedev, he will now become deputy head of the security council. This new position was invented just for him. For the former prime minister — the second most powerful person in the country — such a transfer doesn’t exactly mark a sign of success. However, this impression might be premature. The head of the security council is Vladimir Putin himself. It was the security council, not the Ministry of Defense, that was responsible for the Crimea operation.

For Medvedev, who has mainly been involved in matters of Russia’s economy and industry in recent years, this is an atypical position. Therefore, it is hard to say for sure whether it is a demotion or another strategic maneuver. For Putin, Medvedev is still a special person. He once entrusted him with the power over the country, and Medvedev gave it back without question. Putin values such people, as loyalty is the most important quality in his eyes.

What Happens Next?

A referendum on changing the constitution could potentially take place in September. Journalists and analysts are desperate to predict Russia’s future. Only one person knows for sure  what awaits the country in 2024 — Vladimir Putin, and he is in no hurry to reveal his cards. A referendum on the constitution, parliamentary elections in 2021 and a full four years before the end of his current presidential term are still ahead of him. 

For example, by that time the next US president will have already been elected to replace the one who came into power in 2020. The only thing we can state with certainty is that Putin is not going anywhere. Perhaps he will no longer be addressed as president, but he won’t stop ruling Russia. Now he is setting the scene for a new role. More precisely, you could even say he is forming a parallel government, a system within a system.

Perhaps he’ll take over as prime minister? It’s doubtful. Officially Putin doesn’t even have a political party. In the last election, he ran as an independent, unwilling to be associated with any political bloc.

Maybe he rewrites the constitution and stays for a new term? Theoretically speaking, it’s possible. Recent events have shown that the Russian Constitution is subject to amendment and can rewritten to suit the political ambitions of the ruling class. If a new constitution brings in a new order and new rules allowing Putin to run again, this would potentially means two more new terms and another 12 years of Putin. However, in this case, he will never get rid of the reputation of a dictator — even formally.

Maybe Putin will concentrate all the powers in the state council? This is the more likely scenario. For good reason, he seeks to enshrine this office, which will allow him to oversee the various sectors of government and the direction of the country’s foreign and domestic policy, in the constitution. Putin has four years to give the council the power it needs. It looks like the president will learn from neighboring Kazakhstan, where Nursultan Nazarbayev, who ruled his country for almost 30 years, voluntarily moved to the position of chair of the security council. In fact, Nazarbayev had become a local Ayatollah Khameini — Iran’s supreme leader — without whom no meaningful decision can be made. Putin may indeed embrace the role of the father of the nation.

Most likely, Putin is looking for a position where he could influence key decisions in the country, but not be in the foreground. In this case, it is no longer so important who becomes the new president of Russia. Maybe Dmitry Medvedev again, or someone else. Whoever it is, the country will continue to be ruled by Putin and his entourage. The same people will remain in power and will only swap their official titles. In this sense, Russia is beginning to increasingly mirror China, where it is impossible to engage in politics if you are not a member of the Communist Party. The only difference is that in Russia, it’s Putin’s party, and the country’s opinion has no meaning.

*[Correction: An earlier version of this article mistakenly referred to the state council as federation council in the last reference. This piece was updated on January 24, 2020.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Putin Is Leaving, But Not Saying Goodbye appeared first on 51�Թ�.

US President Donald Trump’s recent intention to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) with Russia brought the issue of nuclear security to the top of the agenda once again. In October, Washington cited a violation of the conditions of the treaty by Moscow as a formal reason for . According to Trump, Russia has been creating new offensive weapons — and not for the first time — which is prohibited by agreement. In particular, Washington is worried about Russia’s SSC-8 missile system, which, to US Undersecretary of State Andrea Thompson, has a range of 500-5,500 kilometers.

In turn, Moscow states that it informed the Americans of the technical characteristics of the missile and provided the results of its tests. The Russian military claims that the launch of the SSC-8 was conducted at a distance significantly lower than 500 kilometers. However, the Pentagon believes that the characteristics, as well as the range of the missile, can change and hit the target at 5,500 kilometers from the launch site.

The first accusations of a breach of agreement were made in 2014, when Washington presented a report that claimed Moscow tested the latest ballistic missile back in 2008. At the time, there was no question of exiting the treaty. Then-President Barack Obama only expressed concern and threatened to file a complaint of violations with NATO. However, this was the end of it. President Trump has gone on to criticize the previous administration for maintaining this treaty despite all the evidence of violations.

Moscow has also made accusations of American non-compliance with the conditions of the INF Treaty. The Russian side believes that the US Aegis Ashore missile defense systems in Romania and Poland are “dual use” weapons. According to Russian specialists, these complexes have not only defensive, but also offensive functions. For Moscow, the appearance of American ballistic missiles in Europe means that NATO would have the capacity to sweep Russian territory almost as far as the Ural Mountains. In connection with the protracted crisis in relations between Russia and the West, Moscow seriously contemplates potential outcomes of the situation.

“If the United States does withdraw from the INF treaty, the main question is what they will do with these newly available missiles. If they will deliver them to Europe, naturally our response will have to mirror this,” Russian President .

You’re the Reason I’m Leaving

The prospect of the United States leaving the agreement is unpopular with European leaders. In the event of a conflict between Moscow and Washington, the main military theater will be in Europe. “The announcement by the United States that it intends to withdraw from the INF Treaty is regrettable,” Germany’s foreign minister, Heiko Maas. “It poses difficult questions for us and for Europe. We also ask the United States to consider the possible impact of its decision.”

However, the United States has accumulated quite a few reasons for leaving the treaty, regardless of whether Russia is really violating its terms. More than 30 years have passed since the signing of the INF Treaty. During this time, the world has changed in meaningful ways. New technologies and economic development in what used to be considered to be Third World countries has forced the US to think about military threats beyond Russia. Today, Iran has the ability to launch long-distance nuclear charges, with Pakistan is nearing this capacity as well. In 2017, North Korea’s ballistic missile tests created a serious crisis on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump directly  Kim Jong-un that North Korea would “be met with fire and the fury like the world has never seen.”

Despite the cessation of missile tests after a summit in Singapore between Trump and Kim, North Korea’s leader still has the opportunity to return to these interrupted drills at any moment. However, it’s possible that these launches from the DPRK could have never happened if it weren’t for China’s influence. Beijing is Pyongyang’s most important ally in the region, both ideologically and economically. China helps North Korea to survive under international sanctions by supplying the republic with food and energy. Beijing uses Pyongyang to contain American presence in South Korea. The launch of North Korean’s ballistic missiles could have been China’s way to start bargaining with the US about reducing the number of US military and weapons (the same Aegis Ashore) in the region. That’s exactly what Beijing and Moscow criticized the Americans for during the crisis on the Korean Peninsula.

Experts have long predicted that China will be playing the role of the new world hegemon. The rapidly developing economy and the country’s military capabilities are forcing the West to seriously think about containing this growing influence. Three or four highly mobile medium-range missile systems allow China to deliver a sudden strike from anywhere in their country. This alignment of forces affects not only US allies in the region, but also directly threatens the US military based in South Korea and Japan.

Thus, despite breaking the agreement with Moscow, Washington’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty is most likely a measure specifically aimed at Beijing. This is partly confirmed by President Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, who tried to to Moscow that Chinese missiles threaten the “heart of Russia.” “We see China, Iran, North Korea all developing capabilities which would violate the treaty if they were parties to it. So the possibility that could have existed fifteen years ago to enlarge the treaty and make it universal today just simply was not practical. The threat from China is very real, you can ask countries like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia how they feel about the Chinese capabilities and they’re very nervous about it,” , adding that between a third and a half of the total number of Chinese ballistic missiles do not comply with the INF Treaty.

Washington openly makes it clear that the United States is generally not against the treaty itself, but instead wants the agreement to include other participants. Since the multilateral format of such an agreement is practically unobtainable, Washington does not want to limit the possibility of deploying strategic weapons. Another question concerns where these weapons might reappear after the US withdraws from the deal — in Europe or in Asia Pacific? The confrontation between Washington and Beijing has already begun, even if it is proceeding at a rather passive pace. And if Chinese trade duties were a measure of economic impact, then quitting the INF Treaty would be the first open step by the United States to contain China in a military direction.

Unfriendly Steps

In Beijing, this decision is addressed with restraint, and politicians urge Washington to abandon the unilateral termination of the agreement. “We oppose this unilateral step, and also oppose imparting a multilateral character to the INF Treaty,” a Chinese diplomat .

Despite a series of unfriendly steps by the US toward China, today it is hard to imagine a real military conflict between the two countries. The economic ties between Beijing and Washington are too strong and too interdependent to break over a geopolitical confrontation. News of a between Washington and Beijing gives rise to hopes that the trade war will be over soon. President Trump the introduction of new tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods and set a 90-day framework for the search for a compromise on the trade deal.

President Trump also about the need to begin a dialogue with Russia and China on non-proliferation of weapons. Most likely, the president is trying to bargain for Beijing’s participation in the INF Treaty in exchange for the abolition of duties and economic opportunities. Progress in negotiations between China and the United States was achieved at the G20 summit in Argentina.

Shortly before the summit, the American president canceled his scheduled meeting with President Putin, citing Russia’s aggressive actions against Ukraine in the Sea of Azov. Thus, Washington continues to put pressure on Moscow preferring, unlike Beijing, to issue ultimatums. US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, gave Moscow 60 days to return to the compliance with the INF committee, promising that Washington will withdraw from the deal if the demands are not met. “The burden falls on Russia to make the necessary changes,”  on December 4. “Only they can save this treaty.”

However, in order to find a compromise with Moscow, it is not enough for Washington to simply give out ultimatums. Unlike China, Russia will not gain anything by announing the destruction of SSC-8. In addition, this will de facto mean that the Russian side has recognized a violation of the terms of the contract. Peace treaties are much easier to create than to maintain. The Russian leadership does not respond to ultimatums. Pleas from Secretary Pompeo are unlikely to be the exception to this rule, especially after the Pentagon’s suggestion that Washington may also withdraw from another security treaty, the New Start. “I will not obviously not make this decision. I’ll make recommendations,” Marine General Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “But it’s very difficult for me to envision progress in extending (New START) … if the foundation of that is non-compliance with the INF Treaty.”

In Moscow, such statements are treated as blackmail, which does not help mutual trust. A possible solution could be a personal meeting between Putin and Trump. If the American leadership is really interested in the multilateralism of the INF Treaty, then it will have to turn a blind eye to both Ukraine and other disagreements with Russia for the sake of global nuclear security.

This is also what Moscow wants. Russia’s current economic climate would spell a poor start for a new arms race. Once before, such a race has already cost Moscow the collapse of the Soviet Union. At the same time, Russia is ready for the United States to exit from the INF Treaty and is already imagining the future outside the framework of this agreement. In recent years, Russia has faced serious international pressure, and yet another unfriendly step is hardly a surprise for Moscow — just another problem in addition to a plethora of existing crises. Thus, the United States has 90 days to exchange Beijing’s participation in the INF Treaty on a trade deal and 60 days to make an offer to Vladimir Putin he cannot refuse.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Is the US Withdrawal from the INF Treaty an Attempt to Contain China? appeared first on 51�Թ�.