MOSCOW, September 7 (RIA Novosti political commentator Peter Lavelle). During his Monday meeting with the Valdai Discussion Group, President Vladimir Putin provided an important insight into how he understands political stability, the country's political culture, and his personal role regarding both.
In 2000, Putin ran as a presidential candidate on a platform consisting of one plank: "dictatorship of law." At that time, it was not entirely clear whether Putin was influenced and motivated (at least intuitively) by either Thomas Hobbes' doctrines of "state of nature" and "social contract", or Max Weber's "legal-rational authority" exercised by modern bureaucrats and a functioning constitution.
An example demonstrating the president's conflicting political preferences arose when he responded to a question concerning a possible change to the constitution to allow him to run for a third term. Putin answered, "I will not run for the presidency in 2008. I think stability is the most important thing for the country. And the constitution is a guarantor of stability. So I am not going to amend it."
Putin's reply is interesting in many ways - and tells us a lot about his views on politics and stability. As the 2008 presidential election nears, the conventional wisdom among pundits and various spin doctors is that Putin and his inner circle will, one way or another, change the constitution, permitting a third presidential term because of his popularity, and claim to be the (personal) nexus of Russia's political stability.
Has Putin's political thinking evolved since the start of his presidency? It would seem so, but only up to a point. At the start of his presidency, it would be fair to say that Putin seized upon the idea of stability as his top priority, and pursued a policy of building a rule-of-law state from above based on his personal authority. His personal authority and popularity - not the constitution - provided the foundation for a new "social contact," i.e. denying the oligarchs control of media and retuning key sectors of the economy to state control.
Putin's comment on the constitution this week appears to suggest something very different from the first years of his presidency. Does he now believe that the constitutional order (or some kind of "rule of law") is the nexus of political stability? Has Putin transformed himself from a Hobbsian into a Weberian?
Everything Putin has said suggest this, except for his words with regard to constitutional changes - "So I am not going to amend it." The use of the personal pronoun "I" in the preceding sentence implies a hybrid of two opposite approaches to politics - an imposed "social contract" from above vs. "legal-rational authority" based in the rule of law. The use of the pronoun "I" also suggests that Putin will personally continue to determine how his "social contract" is interpreted by the constitution.
Is this an expression of Russian political culture under the conditions of democracy? This would appear to be the case. As long as political stability remains the Kremlin's top priority, Hobbes and Weber will peacefully co-exist in Russian politics.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board.
