A Duma without one Westerniser

By Andrei Ostalski
BBC Russian Service

The results of Sunday's elections in Russia are bad news for the West, which, it seems, has not a single friend left in the Russian parliament.

Kasparov's party could not run, nor could the independent Ryzhkov

Not that the previous Duma ever hesitated to demonstrate its patriotic credentials and snub Nato at every turn. But at least there were a few daring independent deputies who at times would challenge the views of the majority.

One such was Vladimir Ryzhkov, whose dissident stance on human rights and freedoms in his own country, as well as international issues, earned him the wrath of nationalists and wide respect among liberals - both inside and outside Russia.

On Sunday, Mr Ryzhkov and others like him lost their platform - and a chance to speak to the nation.

The loophole has now been closed. The new electoral law does not allow independents to stand. All candidates had to represent a major political party to stand a chance of winning a seat.

Communist opposition

Not that every party could take part in the elections. For instance, the United Civil Front of former chess world champion Garry Kasparov and the Popular Democratic Union of former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov were excluded.

Out of 11 parties endorsed by the authorities, only two - the Union of Right Forces and Yabloko - advocated liberal values and partnership with the West. But neither of them could cross the 7% threshold for representation in the chamber.

Interestingly, the common denominator for all four parties that will be sitting in the legislature is their open dislike of the West and everything it stands for.

The Communists are the opposition - but also anti-Western

The Communists remain the only true opposition to President Putin in the parliament. They are scathing about his economic and social policies - but fully support his newly acquired assertiveness in foreign relations.

They welcome his readiness for big and small confrontations over political and military issues as a partial return to the Soviet view of the world.

For their part, Vladimir Zhirinovsky's ultra-nationalist Liberal Democrats have no love for the Communists and never miss a chance to pick a fight with them. Yet this antipathy seems not to extend to foreign policy either. If anything, the LDPR's stance is even more militant.

It is no accident that Andrei Lugovoi - the main suspect in the poisoning of former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko - was elected as number two on their list of candidates.

The choice played well to the public gallery and probably won the party a few extra votes. It will no doubt remain a constant irritant in Russian-British relations for a long time to come. It will also enhance Mr Zhirinovsky's reputation as a firebrand Russian patriot.

The two other parties - United Russia and its younger brother, A Fair Russia - have both made total loyalty to President Putin the main plank of their political programmes. Together they will control nearly three-quarters of the seats and will make sure the Duma always does the Kremlin's bidding.

They will take their lead from the president (or his appointed successor) and will be as radically anti-Western as needed.

All-permeating TV

To be fair, this will also involve occasional tactical retreats and compromises. For instance, if the Kremlin decides for any reason to resume Russia's participation in the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty it will have no problem securing the necessary vote in parliament.

The opposite is also true: if the executive power ever wishes to abrogate another international treaty, the Duma will not take long to deliver.

Why should the West care about the Duma?

It's like in Soviet times, we are becoming dissidents because there are no legal ways to be in the opposition Vladimir Ryzhkov

The parliament may not matter much as a legislative body but it remains an important ideological forum. Parliamentary debates, or fragments of them, will no doubt again be televised daily, reinforcing the public's views and prejudices.

Those broadcasts have already helped bring about the surge of popular nationalism seen over the last few years. This time there will be no Vladimir Ryzhkov to present an alternative opinion.

This is not to say that the mistrust of the West in Russia is not genuine. Opinion polls indicate the steady rise in feelings of national pride, bordering on xenophobia and a siege mentality.

There are many reasons for that: the bitter echo of the 1990s when ordinary people's life savings were wiped out by hyperinflation; unhappy memories of living on the verge of anarchy under Boris Yeltsin; widespread nostalgia for the days of imperial greatness. The loss of empire and the anarchy of the 90s are both associated with the pro-Western liberals, who were in power at the time.

Some Russians blame the West, too, for ignoring the country's sensitivities.

And, of course, the all-permeating power of state-controlled television played an overwhelming role in turning Russia from a hesitant friend into a suspicious and hostile neighbour of the West.

Vladimir Ryzhkov is bitter. He believes Sunday's elections were so openly, flagrantly unfair and unjust that he has described them as "the rape of the nation".

He is certainly right that there will be nobody to take his place in the chamber and that a significant section of public opinion will remain unrepresented in the political system. "It's like in Soviet times, we are becoming dissidents because there are no legal ways to be in the opposition," he said.

Still, Russia has not turned back into another Soviet Union. The rift with the West is not yet a new Cold War. There are no proxy wars being fought in the developing world. But Sunday's elections may have made all those things of the past more possible in the future.