Jump to content

Putin shake-up could keep him in power past 2024 as cabinet steps aside


webfact

Recommended Posts

Putin shake-up could keep him in power past 2024 as cabinet steps aside

By Andrew Osborn and Vladimir Soldatkin

 

2020-01-15T135239Z_2_LYNXMPEG0E11J_RTROPTP_4_RUSSIA-PUTIN.JPG

Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers his annual address to the Federal Assembly in Moscow, Russia January 15, 2020. Sputnik/Mikhail Klimentyev/Kremlin via REUTERS

 

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed constitutional changes on Wednesday that would give him scope to extend his grip on power after leaving the presidency, and picked a new prime minister after Dmitry Medvedev and his cabinet stepped down.

 

Most importantly, Putin suggested diminishing the powers of the presidency and beefing up those of the prime minister.

 

The dramatic moves were widely seen as preparing the ground for 2024, when Putin, now 67, is obliged to leave the presidency after occupying the Kremlin or the prime minister's job continuously since 1999.

 

Putin nominated Mikhail Mishustin, 53-year-old head of the tax service, as the next prime minister. Mishustin, who will be quizzed by parliament on Thursday, has played ice hockey with Putin but has little public profile and had not been spoken of as a possible candidate.

 

He will inevitably be viewed as a possible successor to a shrunken presidency, as will members of his cabinet, many of whom are expected to be new to government.

 

Critics have long accused Putin, a former KGB officer, of plotting to stay on in some capacity after his term ends to wield power over the world's largest nation - and one of its two biggest nuclear powers.

 

His proposals, which he suggested should be put to a referendum, would give him the option of taking an enhanced role as prime minister after 2024 or a new role as head of the State Council, an official body he said he was keen to build up. He could even become speaker of a new, supercharged parliament.

 

Opposition politician Leonid Volkov said it looked as though Putin was digging in.

 

'LEGAL COUP'

"It's clear to everyone that everything is going exclusively towards setting Putin up to rule for life," he wrote on social media.

 

Dmitry Gudkov, another opposition politician, said Putin, re-elected last year for his fourth term, had decided to re-arrange everything around him now rather than wait until closer to 2024.

 

"Constitutional coups like this occur and are completely legal," wrote Gudkov.

 

Under the current constitution, which sets a maximum of two successive terms, Putin is barred from immediately running again, but his supporters find it hard to imagine Russian political life without him.

 

It was unclear when a referendum on the changes might be held or when the changes could take effect, but Putin told the political elite in his annual state-of-the-nation speech that he wanted the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, to have the power to choose the prime minister and other key positions.

 

"It would increase the role and significance of the country's parliament ... of parliamentary parties, and the independence and responsibility of the prime minister," he said.

 

Hours after Putin set out the changes in his annual state-of-the-nation speech, Medvedev said he was stepping down as prime minister to give Putin room to carry out his plans.

 

Putin thanked Medvedev, a longtime ally, for what he had achieved, adding, perhaps with an eye on complaints about Russia's listless economy: "Not everything worked out of course - but then, nothing ever works out totally."

 

Putin said Medvedev would take on a new job as deputy head of Russia's Security Council, which Putin chairs.

 

DOMESTIC AGENDA

Putin remains popular with many Russians who see him as a welcome source of stability, even as others complain that he has been in power for too long, that their pensions and standard of living are being steadily eroded, and that poverty is widespread and healthcare poor.

 

Dmitri Trenin, head of the Moscow Carnegie Center, said Putin appeared to be moving to limit the power of a presidential successor.

 

Trenin also tweeted: "Mikhail #Mishustin’s elevation to Russia's PM is designed to get more competent leadership in Cabinet, which will have to focus on all-important domestic agenda. Medvedev's career isn't over, Putin still needs him in transition scenario. He remains what he's always been: (Putin's) alter ego."

 

Medvedev's resignation took Russian markets by surprise. The rouble and stocks suffered sharp losses before rebounding to make gains amid the uncertainty.

 

"In a nutshell, we take this announcement as an attempt by Putin to shake up Russia's polity and refocus the administration on implementing the president's well-telegraphed but slowly progressing public spending program," Citi said in a note.

 

The rouble <RUBUTSTN=MCX> dropped to 61.81 to the dollar after the news reports about the government but soon regained ground to stand little changed at 1800 GMT.

 

Against the euro, the rouble briefly dropped to 68.86 <EURRUBTN=MCX>, but recovered to stand 0.3% higher at 68.58 by 1810.

 

The dollar-denominated RTS share index <.IRTS> fell 1% on the day minutes after the resignation reports, but rebounded to finish 0.17% lower. The rouble-based MOEX Russian share index <.IMOEX> closed up 0.1%.

 

(Reporting by Maria Kiselyova, Tom Balmforth, Vladimir Soldatkin, Maria Tsvetkova, Gabrielle Tetrault-Farber, Polina Ivanova and Andrey Kuzmin; editing by Mike Collett-White and Kevin Liffey)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-16
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

The american system shows that there is a mayor shift in policies everytime a new president becomes elected . That can become confusing to foreign partners in agreements still signed by the former president ... Putin at least is a reliable factor when it comes to ever changing policies ...


If it happens every time, how is it confusing? 
 

One would think that as it has (apparently) happened 44 times they would see it coming, yes?

 

 

Edited by mogandave
Added apparently
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Putin nominated Mikhail Mishustin, 53-year-old head of the tax service, as the next prime minister. Mishustin, who will be quizzed by parliament on Thursday, has played ice hockey with Putin but has little public profile and had not been spoken of as a possible candidate.

 

He will inevitably be viewed as a possible successor to a shrunken presidency, as will members of his cabinet, many of whom are expected to be new to government.

This is probably the most interesting thing about this shuffle. As already ex-president Medvedev could have had too much power over the old Putin's clan after Putin steps down, if he steps down.

 

It's difficult to see how Putin can retire. What his status would be after the retirement? Senior President who has power over acting president?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

The american system shows that there is a mayor shift in policies everytime a new president becomes elected . That can become confusing to foreign partners in agreements still signed by the former president ... Putin at least is a reliable factor when it comes to ever changing policies ...

And that's why the Russian economy is around the size of California's despite being similar sizes with equal natural resources. Women are far better looking than most yank ones though. 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Something like this happened in Singapore: the son took over for the father, but anyone with eyes could see papa was still holding the reigns.  If you mentioned it you'd probably get whipped.

 

 

You do know that Singapore has election every 4 years and a non Lee was PM for 8 years. No one gets whipped if they want to talk about it unless you have proper case to mention. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Berkshire said:

Bizarre comment.  It's the same in all democracies throughout the world.  Dictatorships are only good for the dictator and his cronies, not so much for the common citizen.  

One could make that same argument for the Trump administration, when it comes to the common citizen (the lower 80%). The common man and the middle class is getting decimated in America. Nothing great about that, unless you are wealthy, or a corporation. My heart goes out to the average American. I spend time there, and only those making alot of money are happy with the way things are going. Sure, some are making some money on the grossly over inflated stock market. But, at what cost to the future of the nation and its people?

 

Edited by spidermike007
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

You do know that Singapore has election every 4 years and a non Lee was PM for 8 years. No one gets whipped if they want to talk about it unless you have proper case to mention. 

 

And all elections were free and fair; all media had complete free speech; and all political parties were free from persecution.

 

Total open and free democracy. The people just wanted the Lees to rule them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

One could make that same argument for the Trump administration, when it comes to the common citizen (the lower 80%). The common man and the middle class is getting decimated in America. Nothing great about that, unless you are wealthy, or a corporation. My heart goes out to the average American. I spend time there, and only those making alot of money are happy with the way things are going. Sure, some are making some money on the grossly over inflated stock market. But, at what cost to the future of the nation and its people?

 


How are the 80% getting decimated?

 

As we all know market growth is due to Obama policies, not Trump’s, will the future cost to the nations and it people be Obama’s fault? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mogandave said:


How are the 80% getting decimated?

 

As we all know market growth is due to Obama policies, not Trump’s, will the future cost to the nations and it people be Obama’s fault? 

This is not entirely on Trump. The middle class in the US has been getting hit for years now. But Trump policies are not helping. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mogandave said:


What would help?

 


 

 

Affordable health care. I know couples that pay over $1200 a month, without children, for health care. That is sheer insanity. The cost of health care in the US is completely out of control. Why? Lobbyists? 

 

Forcing big pharma to lower the cost of prescription medicine. Many meds that cost $250 in the US, are available for $20 in dozens of other countries. This has nothing to do with R & D, as they claim, and everything to do with US corruption, lobbying, and a completely compromised senate, congress and executive branch. Trump has never met a lobbyist he has said no to.

 

Insane housing costs, largely driven by artificially low interest rates, largely driven by an insane desire to keep the economy pumped up to maximum levels, like the Hindenberg. I could go on. If only the political will was there to help the commoner (the lower 80%), in the US. It is not.

 

Inflation. Though the liars at the top keep feeding us with inane numbers, the truth is that costs are spiraling. I see it every time I visit.

 

If corporations were more concerned about their employees, and less concerned about their bottom lines, and their returns to their stockholders, millions would be able to make a decent living, and enjoy the kinds of benefits their parents had. No idea how to change that mentality. The corporations in the US do not hold sway over the US government. They own and control the government. 

 

Shall I go on? I could go on for hours. 

Edited by spidermike007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

You do know that Singapore has election every 4 years and a non Lee was PM for 8 years. No one gets whipped if they want to talk about it unless you have proper case to mention. 

One non-Lee in the last 60 years, Goh Chok Tong was picked as a ruling party puppet while Lee's son Lee Hsien Loong matured, he was too young at 38.  Free elections in Singapore meant you got free housing upgrades when your sub-district voted for the ruling (Lee) party. True freedom of speech was only allowed at an small isolated place called "Speakers Corner". A few people might show up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

"It's clear to everyone that everything is going exclusively towards setting Putin up to rule for life,"

 

Did anyone think that he was ever going to step down and leave power? Seriously?

 

If he were to ever step down, someone might ask how he accumulated enough money to be considered, unofficially, the richest person on the planet; his unofficial wealth has been pegged at approximately 200 Billion dollars and by 'means not understood' his 'friends' are also billionaires.

 

Sadly, Earth is stuck with him for a while longer...

 

https://www.newsweek.com/how-rich-vladimir-putin-us-senate-wants-know-russia-president-net-worth-1331458

 

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a14480615/vladimir-putin-net-worth/

 

https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/14/news/putin-wealth-russia-election/index.html

 

 

 

Yet some might say " Better the devil you know than the  devil you do not".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that it won't end well for Putin. He's terrified of anyone else ever taking over Russia as he's open to corruption charges and confiscation of assets. There's no decent other country that he can retire to and he'd be charged if he tried to settle in the west. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

I have a feeling that it won't end well for Putin. He's terrified of anyone else ever taking over Russia as he's open to corruption charges and confiscation of assets. There's no decent other country that he can retire to and he'd be charged if he tried to settle in the west. 

Putin is most likely going to be fine for the rest of his life, even after he resigns from the presidency. 

 

The next Russian PM is going simply to pave the way Putin's retirement. It's easy as he is not well known and everybody expects him to be Putin's marionette. 100% loyal to Putin. 

 

The next PM, who will eventually become the Russian president, after Putin resigns in 2024, is more hard liner. Someone, who will not destroy Putin's legacy by exposing Putin's and his cronies high corruption against Russian people. Someone who is also 100% loyal to Putin as he is appointed to become the next president by Putin.

 

Putin will keep a high status in Russian intelligence / security forces, which protects him for life.

 

Now. The only thing Putin has to be afraid of, is his daughters, who probably will suffer after Putin has lost his power or dies. That's the Russian way to keep the tabs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Affordable health care. I know couples that pay over $1200 a month, without children, for health care. That is sheer insanity. The cost of health care in the US is completely out of control. Why? Lobbyists? 


Your friends are paying for insurance, they’re paying for other people’s healthcare. Once an insurance company has to accept enrollees with preexisting conditions, it’s no longer insurance.

 

I would argue government involvement drives the cost up more than anything. Many elective procedures are cheaper in the US than at a decent private hospital here. 
 

In any event, your plan would be to tax the greedy rich to make it “free” for the poor, yes? 
 

How did the ACA work out? I had great insurance through my job with a Fortune 200 company, Did not get to keep my plan and my premium went up 40% the first year.  

 

The people that were already getting it free continued to get it free.

 

Quote

Forcing big pharma to lower the cost of prescription medicine. Many meds that cost $250 in the US, are available for $20 in dozens of other countries.

 

How do you force them to lower prices? 
 

Quote

This has nothing to do with R & D, as they claim, and everything to do with US corruption, lobbying, and a completely compromised senate, congress and executive branch. Trump has never met a lobbyist he has said no to.

 

How do you know it has nothing to do with R & D? 
 

My wife uses Dramamine. About a dollar a piece in the US (nicely packaged) and about a dime a piece (blister-pack) here. What do you think the liability costs in the US compared to here? 
 

I used a medication here that saved my life, but cost over $30k for the full treatment. I was somewhat cheaper in the US and people with no money could get it free. 

 

Quote

Insane housing costs, largely driven by artificially low interest rates,

 

There are lots of areas of the US where housing is quite affordable. While I would agree that lowering interest rates would drive prices up, I don’t see how a long term low rate in and of itself drives the price up. Perhaps you can explain it? 
 

I do no that in much of CA, over 50% of the cost of a new home is due to government mandates. 
 

Quote

largely driven by an insane desire to keep the economy pumped up to maximum levels, like the Hindenberg.

 

Why is keeping the economy pumped up an insane desire? Who doesn’t want more money? In any event, the market has been performing pretty well for a good long time. 
 

Personally, I think the internet providing continuous news and information combined with online trading has done a lot to not only drive the market, but model it as well. Quarterly numbers have always been a big deal, but twenty years ago companies seemed to have a much longer term focus. 


I think QE is a much bigger concern than low interest rates. As long as banks make money on the loans...

 

Quote

I could go on. If only the political will was there to help the commoner (the lower 80%), in the US. It is not.


What political will? Your only solutions are free medical and higher interest rates, correct? 
 

Seems like every Democrat candidate is offering free medical, yes? 


Isn’t the Fed slowly raising interest rates? 

 

Quote

Inflation. Though the liars at the top keep feeding us with inane numbers, the truth is that costs are spiraling. I see it every time I visit.

 

While I generally agree, they’ve used the same BS measurement for quite some time. That said, does it not seem like it’s higher here? 
 

in any event, what would you do, cost controls?

 

Quote

If corporations were more concerned about their employees, and less concerned about their bottom lines, and their returns to their stockholders, millions would be able to make a decent living, and enjoy the kinds of benefits their parents had.


I know this plays well to the kids, but if the bottom line is red, there are no jobs. 
 

Many millions of people are able to make a decent living,

 

Publicly traded companies are (for the most part) the best employers in the county. 

Who has suffered the most? Low and no skilled workers. 
 

What’s the solution? The left would argue raise the minimum wage, provide free collage tuition and flood the market with more low and no skilled workers. 
 

30% of the US workforce have collage degrees and it’s not enough? 
 

What percentage of people work for minimum wage? 
 

 

Quote

No idea how to change that mentality. The corporations in the US do not hold sway over the US government. They own and control the government. 

 

You mean companies like Amazon and Apple? How do they own and control the government? 
 

Assuming they do, how would you change it? 

 

Quote

Shall I go on? I could go on for hours. 


Please. 
 

Hey, did you used to work on the Spider? 
 

 

 

Edited by mogandave
Added question
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, URMySunshine said:

And that's why the Russian economy is around the size of California's despite being similar sizes with equal natural resources. Women are far better looking than most yank ones though. 

 

    Agree with you on that one ,  Russian ladies are slimmer , than them American fatties , thx  Dennies breakfasts ...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

I have a feeling that it won't end well for Putin. He's terrified of anyone else ever taking over Russia as he's open to corruption charges and confiscation of assets. There's no decent other country that he can retire to and he'd be charged if he tried to settle in the west. 

 

     Thailand , comes to mind , corruption wins ...

     Democracy, a  joke ...

 

Edited by elliss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...