Russia is preparing to hold elections for all 450 seats in its legislative body, the Duma, from September 18-20. However, critics are labeling the event a "poll-temkin village," a staged performance intended to manufacture consent and project an image of democratic legitimacy both domestically and internationally. The outcome is widely seen as predetermined, with President Vladimir Putin's United Russia party expected to secure a majority.
The term "poll-temkin" has been coined to describe the alleged fraudulent nature of the elections, evoking the historical practice of creating deceptive facades. Even Russia's only registered anti-war party, Yabloko, has reportedly been barred from participating, limiting the scope for any genuine dissent.
Elections in Occupied Territories
A particularly contentious aspect of the upcoming elections is the Kremlin's plan to conduct polling in parts of Ukraine that Russia has occupied. These territories have experienced conflict, displacement, and alleged human rights abuses. The inclusion of these areas in Russian elections is viewed by critics as a further assertion of control and an attempt to legitimize the annexation of Ukrainian land.
This practice echoes a similar event in 2014, when Russia conducted a "referendum" in Crimea following its seizure by unmarked troops. Official results claimed an overwhelming majority voted for reunification with Russia, but this was conducted under duress and without the option of remaining part of Ukraine. The current elections in occupied Ukrainian territories are seen as a continuation of this strategy, aimed at projecting an image of popular support where none may exist.
Kremlin-appointed officials in these regions have reportedly been tasked with achieving specific results, including a minimum turnout and a high percentage of votes for Putin's party, further fueling allegations of pre-determined outcomes.
Contrasting Political Climates
The election process in Russia is being contrasted with the political situation in Ukraine. While Ukraine's constitution prohibits national voting under martial law, which is in effect due to the ongoing Russian invasion, political competition and accountability are argued to be more robust. Ukrainian officials, including former Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, have publicly discussed the possibility of future elections, while also highlighting the challenges posed by the war, occupation, and mass displacement.
In contrast, the author suggests that any politician gaining significant popularity in Russia and posing a direct challenge to Putin would likely face severe repercussions, drawing parallels to historical instances of political opposition being suppressed. Ukraine's anti-corruption institutions are noted for their continued operation, demonstrating a commitment to accountability even amidst wartime.
Reflexive Control and International Response
The author posits that Putin's staging of these elections, particularly in occupied territories, is an application of "reflexive control," a KGB tactic designed to place opponents in a no-win situation. The strategy aims to elicit a specific reaction from adversaries, forcing them into a dilemma. If the international community ignores the elections, it could be perceived as tacit acceptance. Conversely, if the world debates the "free and fair" nature of the vote, Russia can then use that engagement to criticize Ukraine for not holding elections itself.
To counter this, the article suggests that American officials should "pre-bunk" the election results, declaring the process fraudulent before the outcomes are even announced. This proactive approach aims to preempt Russia's attempt to use the elections for political leverage against Ukraine and the broader international community.