I have to confess that I was rather surprised by this article. Vladimir Frolov writes a column every week or so about the Tandemocracy in The Moscow Times. He also has a longer version of the column on Russia Profile. In general, Frolov comes down on the side of Putin, and makes harsh statements on the Medvedev Administration’s deficiencies. It has long been suspected that Frolov is in the pay of someone in Putin’s circle.
That being said, this week’s column, while not being overly severe, does not entirely reflect the attitude that I have come to expect from Frolov.
He begins by crediting Putin with things that I would not. “…defeating the militant Chechen insurgency, bringing the regional baron-governors to heel, gradually rebuilding a functioning Russian state, destroying the oligarchic grip on power and resources and restoring the people’s confidence in the country and its future.”
Honestly, I am not sure that any of those things are true. There have been specific cases within the past 2 months or so that disprove every single one of those so-called achievements. The “insurgency” just claimed several terrorist attacks around Russia, and the Caucasus. Granted, there are doubts that they had a role in the accident in Siberia, but you cannot deny that the resurrection of “Riyadus-Salikhiyn Shahid” unmasks Frolov’s claim as a lie. I could go on and on debunking these claims, but I think that most of them are obvious.
But it is Frolov’s final question in Russia Profile that I wonder about. “What is, if there ever was one, Putin’s “exit strategy”?” I doubt that even Putin knows that anymore.