The Kremlin seems to believe that the “Orange Revolution” may take place in Russia. Or, at any rate, the political establishment is very successful in pretending to believe so. One can understand political strategists and paid journalists close to the Kremlin who hope to earn a fortune on this project.

The authorities try to respond to the revolutionary threat by a “preventive counter-revolution” policy. No one knows, whether the experts from the presidential administration are guided by the Herbert Marcuse’s thesis that is forty years old, or they have generated it by themselves, but their actions prove to be deliberate and consistent. Millions of dollars are being spent. Luckily, high oil prices make it easy to get hold of them. “Nashi” youth organization is set up to protect Russia’s national values in the form of the President and the Government; new periodicals are being established solely to propagate the counter-revolution idea.

But the “Orange Revolution” is unlikely to take place in Russia as it was in Ukraine. The social and political situation is quite different here. There are neither popular politicians nor serious forces that could implement the Ukraine’s scenario. However, even though the “Orange Revolution” possibility is illusive, the planned “preventive counter-revolution” would be quite realistic. The authorities are getting ready for the confrontation with the society, they do their best to provoke it.

The fact that Russia has no ‘orange’ forces which could support a democratic coup within the existing political system does not mean that our society is satisfied with the policy pursued by the Government. On the contrary, the discontent is really strong: people are displeased with the Kremlin’s social policy. Though the mass protests caused by the law on the benefit monetization had come to an end by spring, the people’s resentment goes on. Meanwhile, the extremely unpopular housing and communal services reform has begun and the next stage of the education reform will get started in September. In both cases it is all about the abolishment of the still retained social security. The reform of education will result not only in a fee increase but also in a total reduction of the number of colleges and universities. The consequence will be a drastic decrease of the number of students and professors. The federal expenses on education are planned to be minimized by transferring them to the jurisdiction of the local authorities, which fail to provide funds for the existing articles of expenditure. The number of rural schools will be reduced and pupils will be sent to the hostels that resemble soldier barracks and reformatories.

As if to bring oil to the fire the Russian Government decides to lessen the number of military departments at universities whose graduates have a chance not to serve in the army or to serve as officers. It would be possible to draft men as solders after they graduate from university, and those who managed to study at military departments would have to serve as officers for three years. Apparently, the Kremlin officials don’t consider the commercialization of education to be a sufficient reason to cause students’ unrest. To crown it all they have decided to frighten young men with the prospects of inevitable military service.

This summer shows that if a conflict with the authorities occurs it will involve not only students. As compared to the last year the number of industrial disputes and strikes has dramatically increased. Moreover, people’s dissatisfaction with the new Housing Code is getting more and more apparent. An insignificant event is enough to overblow a serious conflict.

The all-Russia student protest day is planned for October 12. The action will be backed up by the Russian teachers’ organizations. The protest day has been initiated by the formal student trade unions, notorious for their corruption and incompetence. However, in the strained social situation such moves can easily go out of their initiators’ control.

Unlike heroes of a would-be “Orange Revolution”, today’s protesters do not aim at overthrowing the President or conducting free elections. Their goals are much more modest: to cancel reforms, that have already been labeled as “cannibal reforms”. The problem is that the people’s opinion of authorities is not getting better in the course of the reforms and the dissatisfaction with the State Duma and the Government is spread over the President who presumably controls ministers and members of the parliament.

Theoretically, the Government is interested in separating social issues from the political ones and in decreasing a degree of confrontation. But it acts the other way round. The Russian officials are so preoccupied with the “preventive counter-revolution” idea that they seek for it. They are sure that an open conflict would enable them to solve all their problems and would authorize their opponents’ cleansing. And at the same time, according to the Kremlin advisors, mass repressions won’t be necessary for all that. In order to bring the society into cohesive tranquility it would be enough to frighten liberals and to prohibit radical left organizations, which would be the first to do the revolting. Recently these organizations have become more influential since their participants’ quantity and the number of conducted actions have increased. Their coordination has been improved (For all the internal contradictions the Youth Left Front has survived and this summer the Left Front came to be formed as the All-Russia political movement). At last, the authorities may suppress not only political activists but also common citizens who do not belong to any political organization but who are too politically active.

So, the country is heading toward social and political confrontation. One may only guess whether it is going to happen in accordance with the presidential administration’s plan or the Kremlin officials would fail to implement the grand scenario once more. If they lose control the people’s discontent will break out. In this case the events in Russia might really turn into something interesting.

Boris Kagarlitsky is a Director of The Institute for Globalization Studies. The article is written specially for "Eurasian Home".

August 16, 2005