Putin to begin fourth term, but what happens in 2024?

Agencies
May 7, 2018

Moscow, May 7: Vladimir Putin will be inaugurated for a historic fourth term on Monday, extending his almost two-decade rule by another six years after predictably winning Russia's March presidential election.

But with no successor and no political competition, what are the possible scenarios when his term ends in 2024?

Without constitutional reform, Putin will not be able to run for the fifth time -- Russian law forbids serving more than two consecutive terms.

Putin, who will turn 72 in 2024, could decide to leave the Kremlin after 24 years in power, making way for a successor.

Russian politics is now dominated by infighting between rival clans of technocrats and the "siloviki" -- representatives of the security services and the army.

"There is already a fight for influence," said political analyst Nikolai Petrov. "Nobody will wait passively, each group will try to promote its interests," he added.

In a March interview to American TV channel NBC, Putin said he had been thinking of a potential successor since 2000.

"There is no harm in thinking about it but at the end of the day it will be the Russian people who decide."

But in making sure no one can compete with him, no politician is currently popular enough to succeed the Kremlin chief. Many analysts say Putin leaving power in six years is unlikely.

One way Putin could continue ruling Russia after 2024 is to stay in power in a different role.

The Russian strongman could revisit his 2008 move, which saw him put forward Dmitry Medvedev as president while he himself became prime minister before returning to the Kremlin in 2012.

"Putin may prepare the regime for a transfer of power. But not from Putin to another president but from Putin to Putin in some other role," said Petrov.

But memories of mass protests in Moscow when Putin and Medvedev swapped back and Putin returned to the Kremlin may put the Russian leader off this option.

Putin's age also makes this scenario problematic. Putin will be 78 in 2030, when he is constitutionally allowed to run for another term.

Konstantin Kalachev, head of the Political Expert Group think tank in Moscow, said Putin knows his successor will have to introduce unpopular economic reforms and wants to "go down in history as the man who did not lose at anything".

Putin could choose to follow China's Xi Jinping in abolishing presidential term limits, thus allowing him to remain president for life.

"I don't think he will refuse power in 2024 even if he has had enough, he is (already) visibly tired," said independent political analyst Dmitry Oreshkin.

"He can't leave because he does not believe that anyone will protect him," he added, saying that Putin has built a system in which everything depends on who is at the top.

So far, Putin has ruled out ruling Russia for life.

"I never changed the constitution, especially for it to benefit me and I do not have this kind of intention today," he told NBC in March.

Oreshkin said Putin does not want to be remembered for changing the constitution and that if he were to remain president for life, it would be done "more elegantly" than in China.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 6,2020

Sydney, Jan 6: Reserve troops fanned out across fire-ravaged regions in three Australian states on Monday after a horror weekend, as the government pledged $1.4 billion over two years to help recover from the devastating months-long crisis.

Catastrophic bushfires have turned swathes of land into smouldering, blackened hellscapes and destroyed an area about the size of the island of Ireland, according to official figures, with authorities warning the disaster still has weeks or months to run.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison, whose government has been criticised for its slow response to the emergency, pledged Australian $2 billion ($1.4 billion) of taxpayer money for a national recovery fund.

"It's a long road ahead and we will be with these communities every step of the way as they rebuild," Morrison said.

Firefighters joined by fresh teams from the US and Canada were taking advantage of rainy and cooler conditions to tackle out-of-control blazes ahead of rising temperatures forecast later this week.

In the biggest-ever call up of reserves, military teams were deployed across eastern Australia to help emergency services assess the damage, restore power and deliver supplies of food, water and fuel to cut-off communities.

For the first time in Australian history the government also deployed its medical assistance team, normally sent to other nations to lend support in the aftermath of their disasters to help evacuees.

"There is no room for complacency, especially as we have over 130 fires burning across (New South Wales) state still," Premier of New South Wales state Gladys Berejiklian said on Monday.

New normal

Almost five million hectares (50,000 square kilometres) have been razed across New South Wales and more than 1.2 million hectares in Victoria since late September, officials said.

That took the total amount of land burnt close to eight million hectares, around the size of the island of Ireland or South Carolina.

Twenty-four people have lost their lives so far, with over 1,800 homes damaged.

Two people are missing in New South Wales, the nation's most populous state.

In Victoria, Premier Daniel Andrews established a bushfire recovery agency to help devastated towns. It will be a permanent body, he said, as intense fires will become commonplace.

"We should just be honest about the fact that we're going to see more and more fires, more and more damage as each fire season comes... this is the new normal," Andrews told reporters.

The chair of the newly established Victoria state's bushfire appeal fund, Pat McNamara, added that this year's summer bushfire season was a "creeping disaster".

"We're still not even into what we would regard as the peak of the fire season," McNamara told national broadcaster ABC.

In the usually picturesque southeastern town of Eden, Holly Spence said she spent more than 12 hours defending her family's farm on Saturday, less than a week after saving it on New Year's Eve.

"We don't want to go through this for a third time," the 28-year-old told AFP.

Fiona Kennelly, 50, who evacuated with 24 members of her extended family to a motel outside Eden, said she was relieved the easing conditions allowed them to get some respite from the crisis.

"It's good to see daylight at the right time again," she told AFP, adding that the skies had been turning pitch-black in the afternoons.

Public anger

The impact of the bushfires has spread beyond affected communities, with heavy smoke engulfing the country's second-largest city Melbourne and the national capital Canberra.

Some government departments were shut in Canberra as the city's air quality was once-again ranked the world's poorest, according to independent online air-quality index monitor Air Visual.

The disaster has sparked growing public anger with Morrison. Rallies are planned on Friday to call on his government to step up efforts to tackle climate change, which experts say have helped fuel the fires.

In Los Angeles, Hollywood superstar Russell Crowe said he was back home fighting the fires and that the disaster was "climate change-based".

"We need to act on science, move our global workforce to renewable energy and respect our planet for the unique and amazing place it is. That way, we all have a future," he said in a message read out by Jennifer Aniston.

Australian actress Cate Blanchett praised the volunteer firefighters battling the blazes, adding: "When one country faces a climate disaster, we all face a climate disaster. We're in it together."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 22,2020

Washington, May 22: The deadly coronavirus came from China and the US is not going to take it lightly, American President Donald Trump said on Thursday.

"It came from China. We are not happy about it. We just signed a trade deal, the ink wasn't dry and all of the sudden this floated in. We are not going to take it lightly,” Trump said participating in a Listening Session with African-American Leaders in Michigan.

Trump in the last several weeks has been very critical of China's inability to control the spread of the novel coronavirus within its territory. By Thursday more than 94,000 Americans have died due to the coronavirus and over 1.6 million have tested positive.

He has so far not given any indication of the steps that he is contemplating taking against China.

Meanwhile, pressure is building on his administration, mainly from the Republican lawmakers on this.

On Thursday, Senators Ted Cruz and Rick Scott, along Mike Braun, Marsha Blackburn, Joni Ernst, Martha McSally and Tom Cotton, introduced the COVID-19 Vaccine Protection Act to prevent the Chinese Communist Party from stealing or sabotaging American COVID-19 vaccine research.

The bill requires a thorough national security evaluation and clearance by the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation of all Chinese student visa holders taking part in activities related to COVID-19 vaccine research.

"The same Chinese Communist Party that covered up the coronavirus outbreak also routinely engages in state sponsored theft of intellectual property," Cruz said. "We cannot allow China to steal or interfere with American research and development of a vaccine,” he added.

"Communist China is responsible for the coronavirus pandemic, and their lies and misinformation cost American lives," Scott said.

"We cannot let Communist China off the hook for this, and we absolutely cannot allow Communist China to steal or sabotage any American research efforts related to the Coronavirus vaccine. The COVID-19 Vaccine Protection Act protects American efforts to create a vaccine as we work to end this pandemic," he added.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Protection Act, among others requires an enhanced vetting of nationals of the Chinese nationals in the US as nonimmigrants under F, J, or M student visas to determine if any student visa holders are a national security threat.

Once the review is complete, authorizes Department of Homeland Secretary, in consultation with other agencies, to continuously monitor all nonimmigrant student visa holders (F, M, J) who are Chinese nationals while in the US and are engaged in, or have access to, the research of any potential COVID-19 vaccine or COVID-19 related material.

Republican Whip and Ranking Member of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis Steve Scalise alleged that China lied to the world on coronavirus.

"During a critical period in December and January, China withheld evidence of the virus: evidence that confirmed human to human transmission of the virus, evidence of the extent of the spread. China refused entry of American and other medical experts from around the world for weeks,” he said.

“And during this time, China hoarded medical supplies like masks, gowns, and other life-saving PPE. Chinese exports of surgical masks, gowns, and gloves were stifled by the Chinese Communist Party during this period. China knew the danger posed by the virus and while they hid the truth, they used the time to stock up on vital medical supplies,” Scalise said.

“While Chinese authorities limited domestic flights from Wuhan to other Chinese cities like Beijing and Shanghai, China's government urged international carriers to maintain their flight schedules — seeding the virus throughout the rest of the world,” he alleged.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.