Medvedev promises new era for Russian democracy
President uses State of the Nation address to deliver damning verdict on country and unveil blueprint for reform
AFP/Getty
The Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, delivers yesterday's State of the Nation speech at the Kremlin
In his biggest speech since taking office yesterday, President Dmitry Medvedev laid out a harsh critique of the state of Russia and unveiled a blueprint for its reform.
The way forward for Russia was for its economy to become modern, hi-tech and innovative, the President said in his annual State of the Nation address. He promised to jail corrupt officials and promote innovative businesses that would be the catalyst of modernisation. Russia had fallen behind, he said, due to its over-reliance on the export of natural resources.
He admitted that Russia had been harder hit than most by the global financial downturn, and insisted that this was partly Russia's own fault. "We need to admit that in the previous years we didn't do enough to overcome the problems we inherited," Mr Medvedev said, in what many will interpret as veiled criticisms of his predecessor, Vladimir Putin. Now Prime Minister but arguably Russia's most powerful politician, Mr Putin received a standing ovation when he entered the Kremlin hall for the address.
There was no direct criticism of his mentor during the 100-minute speech, but Mr Medvedev did attack some areas of the former president's legacy, including the huge state corporations he created, deriding them as outdated and ineffective. He said they would have to reform into commercial companies in the coming years. "We need to launch modernisation and renovation of the entire industrial base. Our nation's survival in the modern world will depend on that," Mr Medvedev said.
Since taking over from Mr Putin in a carefully stage-managed transition of power last year, the President has often appeared to strike a more liberal tone and has frequently stated that the ruling system should become more liberal and flexible.
In September he published an online article entitled "Forward, Russia!", which surprised many with its frank assessment of Russia as a country struggling with an ineffective economy and beset by corruption. Mr Medvedev invited readers to write in with comments and suggestions on how to modernise their country.
However, critics doubt his ability to implement such wide-ranging reforms, and question how much power he actually wields, with most key decisions seemingly taken by Mr Putin.
His speech yesterday was short on concrete policies although he did in-clude plans to build a "Silicon Valley-style centre of innovation" and attract Russian émigré scientists back to the country. He chided authorities in the troubled North Caucasus region for being corrupt, and promised that officials pocketing cash would be imprisoned. In the political sphere, Mr Medvedev had little radical to offer. He has introduced mild reforms to the party political agenda which opposition parties say have made little difference. Regional elections last month were so dominated by Mr Putin's United Russia party that even the parties of mild opposition that are usually happy to play the Kremlin's games staged a walkout of the Duma.
Mr Medvedev proposed abolishing the current requirement for parties wanting to register for elections to collect a large number of signatures in support, which has hampered small parties. He also said that parties not represented in the Duma should still be allowed to gain audiences with the ruling powers. However, the President made it clear there would be no time for the radical opposition. "Attempts to rock the situation with democratic slogans, to destabilise the state and split society will be stopped," he said.
Analysts were sceptical about the President's vision. "Except for a couple of phrases, most of the speech was just wishful thinking and unfounded promises," said Vladimir Pribylovsky, a Moscow-based political analyst.
Changing times: PM promises to cut Russia's 11 time zones
One of the more surprising initiatives unveiled by Dmitry Medvedev yesterday was a plan to reduce the number of time zones in the world's largest country. Russia sprawls over 11 time zones, from the Kaliningrad enclave that borders Poland in the far west, to the volcanic Kamchatka peninsula in the far east.
When government officials arrive for work in Moscow, those in Kamchatka, nine time zones away, are already leaving the office. This creates obvious problems for efficient government and communications, but it was unclear how a reduction in time zones could be implemented without a significant proportion of Russia's population having to wake up in the dark.
Mr Medvedev promised to set up a commission to investigate whether retaining daylight saving time was a good idea for the country, something which, bizarrely, received one of the largest rounds of applause during his whole speech.
It may not seem like a major issue, but some Russian politicians do not appreciate having to change their watches twice a year.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited


Comments
Henri
Is Russia currently invading or occupying any foreign countries? Have its armed forces massacred civilian populations? Has Russia abducted foreigners from the streets of other nations, and taken them to secret torture camps? Has Russia opened any new gulags in offshore locations?
All part of the double standards with which these matters are always addressed.
Henri
I suppose killing Litvinenko is not quite "abducting and torturing" but then again for some - perhaps not for you - killing is actually worst.
Best Regards
Jari
Moldova does complain about Russians creating "Transnistra" from part of their territory. It does complains a lot actually.
Chechnya was conquered by Russia during the Caucasus War - true -, I fail to see how does it adds to the merit of your argument. It did not make it Russian (not for a lack of trying), nor did it made Chechens into Russians. These poor people tried to get out from under Russian yoke many times since: XIX century, then 1905, 1917, and through 1940s, facing massive repressions, executions, and deportations. It is rather highly unlikely that those sentiments were Al-Queda or even "Muslim Fundamentalism" related, wouldn't you say?
Similarly, the most recent Chechnya's independence movement in 1991 and subsequent wars since 1994 had not much to do with Al-Queda. This (convinient) excuse is actually much more recent, created to generate Western sympathy for Russia's military campaign against the Chechens. Again both sides of the conflict were vile and brutal, so I suppose we should find out who killed more civilians: Russian military and their allies or the rebels?
http://www.jamestown.org/programs/ncw/s
http://www.brianglynwilliams.com/shatte
Implying that I AM Al-Queda sympathizer says more about You then me.
This recipe for retaining conquered areas and incorporating or eliminating their inhabitants were (are) used a lot: Russia ( and then Soviet Union) conquered - lets say - Estonia, and it also was trying do change make up of population by killings, particularly the upper socioeconomic class, deportations, russifications, and en masse re-settlements with ethnic Russians. Well, Estonia did managed to regain independence. So did Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine (almost, if you relay want I do can elaborate) etc. Some of them still have various internal problems resulting from the above treatments).
As to the Georgia, well - vide supra. I actually do mean what I write. One can call some if it's parts this or that, and another could argue that for the most part they were never Russian either. Well, never untill the unfortunate Caucasus War.
And truth to be told Georgians are no angels either.
Which brings my other point. I have neither wrote that it is OK for the Americans to kidnap people, maintain base in otherwise independent Cuba, nor to shoot civilians. I have never said it is OK for the Israeli to pulverize the Gaza strip, or Chinese to clubber Tibetans either. But just because THEY do that it is not OK for the Russians to do stuff they do (v.s.) or did.
I do agree that the Kosovo was part of Serbia. That does not automatically translate that the Serbians tugs should suppress and kill Albanians, and by the same principle it should not give the Albanian tugs right to kill and persecute what remains of the Serbian population there.
So going back to my point, I just did give some examples that somebody else had asked for.
Do you have any comments on killing Litvinenko versus "kidnapping foreigners"?
Jari
Does this camera make me look fat?
No, it is the fat that makes you look fat!
I do not think that ultimately the Western media is responsible for demonizing Putin, both as the former Russian president or current prime minister. It is the actions of administration of that country under his leadership: internal policies, persecution of the opposition, international posturing, etc. they all do have rather chilling effect on the observers. I hope I am wrong, but it is hard to believe that president Medvedev being the protege of this system is going to markedly change it. (I have been wrong before)
I would agree that there is a need to scrutinize politicians, policies, actions, and anti-democratic tendencies. Here in the Western hemisphere, but also in Russia and elsewhere.
But in this case the Jupiter you refer to (below), has more then one face, and one of them is Russian.
Jari