Introduction: Perspectives on Putin

Abstract

This collection of essays devoted to the two terms of Vladimir Putin as president of the Russian Federation is based on contributions to a small working conference held in Naples, Italy, on 8–9 May 2008, coinciding precisely with the transfer of the office of president to Dmitrii Medvedev. Papers presented at that conference have been reworked and augmented by further contributions from scholars who were unable to attend, or who were invited to explore dimensions not covered at the conference. It is presented as a collection of views and interpretations of Putin in office from January 2000, when he assumed the position of acting president following the abrupt resignation of his patron, Boris Yeltsin, until his constitutionally required resignation from the post of president in favour of his own chosen successor – endorsed by the electorate on 2 March 2008 – under whose presidency Putin continues to function as prime minister. No attempt was made by the organizers of the conference or the editors of this collection to impose any particular methodological approach or to guide contributors in their analysis or interpretation. The results, therefore, constitute an eclectic range which, it is hoped, will allow readers to gain insight into Putin and his role in developing post-communist Russia to a new stage. Putin’s achievements and the record of his presidency must be judged according to the legacy that he inherited from his predecessor Boris Yeltsin, the first president of Russia, during whose tenure the country experienced one of the most tumultuous decades in its recent history. At the beginning of the 1990s the Soviet Union still existed. It had certainly changed enormously in the five years since Mikhail Gorbachev became General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party in March 1985 – indeed, in many ways, the country was barely recognizable. Under pressure of economic slowdown and potential failure, Gorbachev’s policy of perestroika had permitted elements of the market and private enterprise, while glasnost’ had transformed the political scene by allowing freedom of expression to a degree not permitted since the 1920s; democratization had transformed the electoral system and thereby