John Reuter, assistant professor of political science at 51ÁÔÆæ, has been documenting, analyzing and participating in conversations in and about Russia throughout his 15 years as a political scientist. He studies authoritarian governments in Venezuela, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey and elsewhere.<\/p>\n
Fluent in Russian, and with a working knowledge of Ukrainian, he designs public opinion surveys for Russian voters. This includes hiring pollsters to go door to door in Russia, where they ask about voter behavior, election fraud and political pressure in the workplace.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen you ask Russian voters about their views on democracy, most are strongly pro-democratic,\u201d Reuter says. \u201cThey want democracy; they think they\u2019re living in democracy. Many don’t necessarily see a problem with how their government functions.\u201d<\/p>\n
On March 18, those voters will head to the polls for their seventh presidential election since 1990. Reuter, who holds a senior research appointment with the Moscow-based International Center for the Study of Institutions and Development, shared his political predictions and his long view on the way forward for improved U.S.-Russian relations. He also talks about the special counsel indictments that have roiled Washington, D.C., in recent weeks.<\/p>\n
Russia holds presidential elections\u00a0this month. The first round will be held on March 18. What can we\u00a0expect?<\/strong> Why do you study Russia? <\/strong> What do you mean by the phrase \u2018so consequential?\u2019 Let\u2019s talk about the current intersection in Russian and American politics: the 2016 general elections in the U.S., and the recently issued indictments against 13 Russian citizens and three companies as part of an ongoing investigation into Russian meddling. What do<\/em> you think the Russians were trying to accomplish? <\/strong><\/p>\n It\u2019s a puzzle. Why did they do it? No one has access to the minds of the individuals who are planning this stuff, but I don\u2019t think that they foresaw the outcome of the 2016 elections at all. Like most Americans, Russians thought Hillary would win the presidency. One interpretation is that they are just trying things out; this is a pilot operation. I don\u2019t see any other explanation here.<\/p>\n This kind of activity, by the way, is not new. This meddling is something the Soviets had always done \u2013 funding different activist groups, organizing protests. But now, it\u2019s easier than ever to insert yourself into someone else\u2019s election due to social media and globalization.<\/p>\n Russia is an autocracy and America is a democracy. Russians, however, perceive their government to be <\/strong>democratic. Can you discuss the key structural similarities between our governments and where those similarities end?<\/strong><\/p>\n On paper, our governments do look similar. The president and legislature are directly elected by the people; the legislature has power to constrain the president and effect laws; there is a judicial system in place, and a broadly similar constitutional structure.<\/p>\n Russian politics is different from American politics in two major ways: The president is very, very popular and, of course, Russia is not a democracy. It’s an autocracy with the trappings of a democracy. In Russia, the president and his allies use their positions, and the associated power and privilege, to disadvantage their opponents to a much greater degree than incumbents in U.S. Some autocratic systems do this to such a degree that their elections can no longer be called free and fair.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/em>You mentioned the popularity of Vladimir Putin. Russians know him well. Are there any political or historical figures whom he resembles and that can help Americans understand him better? Russians who support Putin see him as competent, strong, honest \u2013 interestingly enough \u2013 and view him as a professional. He\u2019s very well spoken and there\u2019s even something Clintonesque about him: He\u2019s a policy wonk. Putin has a remarkable mastery of policy details and can go on and on about pensions or inflation. He has it together.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>Can the United States and Russia look forward to a more productive international partnership in the near future? <\/strong><\/p>\n My own view is that we need to find \u2018win-win\u2019 situations in areas of mutual interest \u2013 Iran, Syria, nuclear nonproliferation. There\u2019s already a blueprint in place that proves we\u2019ve been able to find areas of agreement and collaboration. The stakes were much higher during the Cold War, when there was a fundamental ideological conflict between our two countries.<\/p>\n People should be aware that there are now lots of positive connections between Russian and American society. I receive funding from the Russian government to do my research on Russian autocracy. It\u2019s not as closed off as some people might think.<\/p>\n Finally, it\u2019s necessary to depersonalize our relationship with Russia because Putin is not going anywhere. We have to deal with him. It\u2019s not useful to belabor the point, \u2018Is he a bad guy or not?\u2019 It\u2019s more useful to focus on building a pragmatic relationship with the Russians.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The behemoth on the other side of the globe has long loomed large over American foreign policy. On the eve of the Russian presidential election, 51ÁÔÆæ scholar John Reuter talks about that country’s politics and policies. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":487,"featured_media":57219,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","uwm_wg_additional_authors":[]},"categories":[174],"tags":[],"section":[246,247],"display_categories":[115,116],"related-coverage":[],"uwmnews-feed":[167,158,160],"class_list":["post-57218","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","section-business-world-affairs","section-politics-social-science","display_categories-top-story-secondary","display_categories-top-story-section","uwmnews-feed-alumni-association","uwmnews-feed-letters-science","uwmnews-feed-social-science"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nVladimir Putin will absolutely get an absolute majority.<\/p>\n
\nI was drawn to studying Russian in high school in the late \u201990s because there were such fundamental changes happening in that part of the world. Rarely in human history has a country gone through such profound changes \u2013 shifting political systems, a new economic structure \u2013 in such a short period of time. In grad school I had to decide between studying Russian history or politics. I chose politics; it seemed so consequential at the time.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>I mean that the political issues on the agenda in Russia are in many ways more significant than those confronted by American voters and politicians. For example, we might tweak our health care system on margins, we fight about the budget and whether to adjust it by a couple billion dollars here or there. In Russia in the 1990s and early 2000s, they were deciding: \u2018Will we have a welfare state? What will our electoral system look like? What type of capitalist system will we have?\u2019 They were dealing with much bigger issues, and circumstances were changing rapidly.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>There are several aspects of Russian meddling in the last election, some more severe than others. At one end, you have attempts to infiltrate American voting systems, and that is by far the most severe type of intervention and it’s also the one that gets talked about the least. There is no evidence Russian actors tried to change the results, but there is plenty of evidence they tried to gain access to voting systems in a number of states.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Putin\u2019s popularity is complicated \u2013 in large part due to the fact that Russia is not a democracy and the state controls the media. There are a lot of global leaders with whom he shares the characteristics of being inherently popular and using the privileges of his office to disadvantage opponents. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela comes to mind, a compelling and charismatic leader and speaker, though Putin is perhaps a less charismatic figure.<\/p>\n