Connect with us




How Russian democracy works: Russian politics 101




Russia is everywhere in the news today and that means people are focusing on Russian politicians. But who are they? What are their roles? How did they get there?

Here’s everything you need to know about how government in Russia functions.

The Federal Assembly 

This is Russia’s legislature. It is responsible for proposing and voting on individual legislative proposals and appointing and removing major officials.

The Federal Assembly has two legislative houses, the State Duma and the Federation Council. Each has distinct roles.

The State Duma 

The State Duma, sometimes called Russia’s Parliament is made up of democratically elected officials representing multiple parties.

Deputies to the state Duma are elected in one of two ways. 450 deputies are elected through party-list proportional representation. This is the most common voting method in Europe. Here, voters cast their opinion in favour of a party whose leadership delegates individuals to various regions to represent them in the event of a victory.

The remaining 225 seats are won through a single-member ‘first-past the post system’. Here several individuals from various parties or independent candidates stand in an election for a single seat. This is how America’s House of Representatives and Britain’s House of Commons is elected, for example.

Russia’s Duma has four major national parties.

United Russia: United Russia won a majority of seats in the most recent Duma election. This party is endorsed by President Putin and is generally considered a centre-right/moderate conservative party. It is one of Russia’s newer parties, founded in 2001.

United Russia is led by Prime Minister Dimity Medvedev

The Communist Party of The Russia Federation: This party is the successor to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. It has remained consistently popular as a leading opposition party ever since 1991. It is currently the second most popular in Russia. It’s policies offer traditional Marxist-Leninist policies but it does not seek to subvert the Russian Constitution, does not call for revolution and unlike the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, does not seek to undermine the role of the Orthodox Church in Russia, even though most Communist remain non-believers.

Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR): This is Russia’s second oldest party and the first officially registered party in the Soviet Union after the Communist Party. Founded and lead by dynamic leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the party presents a combination of conservative policies that focus heavily on historical patriotism along with economic and social policies that are a combination of mixed-economy policies (capitalism and controlled economy) combined with a commitment to create stability and prosperity in Russia.

Many expect that as the Communist Party’s support ages, the LDPR will become an even bigger player in Russian politics. It currently is the third most popular party in Russia and almost supplanted the Communists as the main opposition party in the most recent Duma election.

A Fair Russia: This is Russia’s centre-left social democratic party. It had previously achieved success but in 2016’s Duma elections it came fourth place. It is still a major party though it’s popularity has recently waned.

The Federation Council of Russia: 

This is the upper-house of the Federal Assembly. It is comprised of 170 deputies (often called Senators), made up of two represntitives from each of Russia’s federal subjects (22 republics, 46 oblasts, 9 krais, 3 federal cities, 4 autonomous okrugs, 1 autonomous oblast).

The members are technically non-partisan but many have a party affiliation. Some want to change this and force each Federal Assembly deputy to declare his or her party openly as Duma deputies do. The LDPR recently proposed such a change.

The Federation Council is responsible for approving President decrees including emergency decree’s and declarations of war or mobilisation of the armed forces.

The Federation Council also must approve of official appointments and can remove corrupt officials including the President.

In practice, the Federation Council has many expert committees including in areas such as foreign affairs, the sciences, the arts and the environment. Many experts on everything from conflict resolution to modern trade initiatives sit in the Federation Council.

The Government of Russia 

The Government of Russia which fulfils a role similar to that of the US Cabinet, is made up of qualified individuals who are selected by the President.

At this time, the most famous such member of the Government is Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

The Government is run by the Prime Minister who oversees the work of all other ministers. This position is currently held by Dimity Medvedev (a former President).

The current Defence Minister is Sergey Shoygu and the Finance Minister is Anton Siluanov.

The Government is responsible both to the President and also to the Federal Assembly.

The President of The Russian Federation 

Russia’s President is elected every 6 years on a one man/woman one vote basis. The Presdient is Russia’s formal head of state and is responsible for shaping foreign and domestic policy. The President often drafts legislation which is presented by a faction of the Duma.

The President has the ability to issue special decrees including emergency decrees. He or she is also responsible for making formal declarations of war.

The President’s most important role is represneting Russia on a world stage.

Russia’s current President is Vladimir Putin. He is eligible to run again in 2018 and most polls indicate that if he does, he will win due to his high approval rating among Russian citizens.

How to run for office at a national level

To become a deputy of the State Duma you must be a Russian citizen over the age of 21. If you are a member of one of Russia’s 14 official parties, it is up to the party to select which region you would represent in the event of a victory at the ballot box.

If you want to start your own party, you must obtain 200,000 signatures from your fellow citizens to get on the ballot.

To run as an independent in a single-member constituency you simply nominate yourself and campaign as best you can.

The vast majority of candidates are eligible for state funding to aid their campaign.

To get on the Russian Presidential ballot you do not need to do anything if you are a member of the State Duma. You simply declare register your candidacy.

If you aren’t but are a member of a major party, you must collect 150,000 signatures. If you wish to run as an independent you must collect 315,000 signatures.

Russia pioneered the use of webcams at all polling stations during all elections. This has helped Russia become one of the most transparent democracies in the world.

The Judiciary

Russia’s independent judiciary is governed by the All-Russian Congress of Judges. This body appoints judges based on personal merit and legal scholarship. Lower court judges are often appointed by the Judicial Qualification Collegia.

Russia’s court system is made up of the following courts, starting with the highest court

–Constitutional Court of Russia

–Supreme Court of Russia

–Regional courts of Russian Federal Subjects

–Raion Courts or District courts.

Small civil matters are often handled by courts of arbitration where small criminal matters such as petty crimes are dealt with by Magistrate courts. Most divorce and family issues are also dealt with in Magistrate courts.

The Moral of This Story

Many people outside of Russia are quick to judge Russia’s governmental system from a position of having no knowledge of it.

In reality, Russia’s government is functional and not dissimilar from that of any other first world nation.

Russia’s political system is far more democratic than the EU and in recent years has shown itself to be far more stable and less confrontational than that of the United States.

Furthermore, while the US has two major parties who are always at each others throats, Russia has four major democratic parties and several other prominent medium sized ones, all of which agree on upholding the Russian Constitution.

When it comes to Russia, ignorance makes for exciting narratives, but knowledge is bliss.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

9 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
9 Comment authors
bbs.iskyrobot.comgold investment companystainless steel strainerchase logonassuntos que caem em concursos Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Thank you for this most helpful article. Do campaigns cost millions of dollars in Russia as in the US ? Where does the funding come from ?
Again thanks


Thеre are, after alⅼ, sօme deetrimental points to freelancing.

One important levl is that if yoou happen too worҝ as a feeelance paralеgal you will
not be eligible fⲟr tthe varieties of advantages that ʏoud have in working forг a law firm օr
a personal аttorney. If you happen to feel that such
“perкs” as general health insurance and other such advantages are important, fгeelancing wont
give youu these benefits.

chase credit card login

What do you love it about Baton Rouge, both professionally and personally.

tci concursos


assuntos que caem em concursos


chase logon

Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Acting Chief Executive Officer
Mohamud Ahmed said they would continue to operate closely
with CBK along with the banking industry to mitigate possible

stainless steel strainer

It’s really a nice and helpful piece of information. I’m happy that you shared this helpful information with us.
Please stay us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

gold investment company

Happy to be among the visitors on this awe inspiring website :

Cutting off a room with a literbox is another example.


At Age 70, Time To Rethink NATO

The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

Patrick J. Buchanan



Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:

“Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.”

So said President Charles De Gaulle, who in 1966 ordered NATO to vacate its Paris headquarters and get out of France.

NATO this year celebrates a major birthday. The young girl of 1966 is no longer young. The alliance is 70 years old.

And under this aging NATO today, the U.S. is committed to treat an attack on any one of 28 nations from Estonia to Montenegro to Romania to Albania as an attack on the United States.

The time is ripe for a strategic review of these war guarantees to fight a nuclear-armed Russia in defense of countries across the length of Europe that few could find on a map.

Apparently, President Donald Trump, on trips to Europe, raised questions as to whether these war guarantees comport with vital U.S. interests and whether they could pass a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

The shock of our establishment that Trump even raised this issue in front of Europeans suggests that the establishment, frozen in the realities of yesterday, ought to be made to justify these sweeping war guarantees.

Celebrated as “the most successful alliance in history,” NATO has had two histories. Some of us can yet recall its beginnings.

In 1948, Soviet troops, occupying eastern Germany all the way to the Elbe and surrounding Berlin, imposed a blockade on the city.

The regime in Prague was overthrown in a Communist coup. Foreign minister Jan Masaryk fell, or was thrown, from a third-story window to his death. In 1949, Stalin exploded an atomic bomb.

As the U.S. Army had gone home after V-E Day, the U.S. formed a new alliance to protect the crucial European powers — West Germany, France, Britain, Italy. Twelve nations agreed that an attack on one would be treated as an attack on them all.

Cross the Elbe and you are at war with us, including the U.S. with its nuclear arsenal, Stalin was, in effect, told. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops returned to Europe to send the message that America was serious.

Crucial to the alliance was the Yalta line dividing Europe agreed to by Stalin, FDR and Churchill at the 1945 Crimean summit on the Black Sea.

U.S. presidents, even when monstrous outrages were committed in Soviet-occupied Europe, did not cross this line into the Soviet sphere.

Truman did not send armored units up the highway to Berlin. He launched an airlift to break the Berlin blockade. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian rebels in 1956. JFK confined his rage at the building of the Berlin Wall to the rhetorical: “Ich bin ein Berliner.”

LBJ did nothing to help the Czechs when, before the Democratic convention in 1968, Leonid Brezhnev sent Warsaw Pact tank armies to crush the Prague Spring.

When the Solidarity movement of Lech Walesa was crushed in Gdansk, Reagan sent copy and printing machines. At the Berlin Wall in 1988, he called on Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.”

Reagan never threatened to tear it down himself.

But beginning in 1989, the Wall was torn down, Germany was united, the Red Army went home, the Warsaw Pact dissolved, the USSR broke apart into 15 nations, and Leninism expired in its birthplace.

As the threat that had led to NATO disappeared, many argued that the alliance created to deal with that threat should be allowed to fade away, and a free and prosperous Europe should now provide for its own defense.

It was not to be. The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

This, said Kennan, would “inflame the nationalistic and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion” and “restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations.” Kennan was proven right.

America is now burdened with the duty to defend Europe from the Atlantic to the Baltic, even as we face a far greater threat in China, with an economy and population 10 times that of Russia.

And we must do this with a defense budget that is not half the share of the federal budget or the GDP that Eisenhower and Kennedy had.

Trump is president today because the American people concluded that our foreign policy elite, with their endless interventions where no vital U.S. interest was imperiled, had bled and virtually bankrupted us, while kicking away all of the fruits of our Cold War victory.

Halfway into Trump’s term, the question is whether he is going to just talk about halting Cold War II with Russia, about demanding that Europe pay for its own defense, and about bringing the troops home — or whether he is going to act upon his convictions.

Our foreign policy establishment is determined to prevent Trump from carrying out his mandate. And if he means to carry out his agenda, he had best get on with it.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Photos of new Iskander base near Ukrainian border creates media hype

But research into the photos and cross-checking of news reports reveals only the standard anti-Russian narrative that has gone on for years.

Seraphim Hanisch



Fox News obtained satellite photos that claim that Russia has recently installed new Iskander missile batteries, one of them “near” to the Ukrainian border. However, what the Fox article does not say is left for the reader to discover: that in regards to Ukraine, these missiles are probably not that significant, unless the missiles are much longer range than reported:

The intelligence report provided to Fox by Imagesat International showed the new deployment in Krasnodar, 270 miles from the Ukrainian border. In the images is visible what appears to be an Iskander compound, with a few bunkers and another compound of hangars. There is a second new installation that was discovered by satellite photos, but this one is much farther to the east, in the region relatively near to Ulan-Ude, a city relatively close to the Mongolian border.

Both Ukraine and Mongolia are nations that have good relations with the West, but Mongolia has good relations with both its immediate neighbors, Russia and China, and in fact participated with both countries in the massive Vostok-2018 military war-games earlier this year.

Fox News provided these photos of the Iskander emplacement near Krasnodar:

Imagesat International

Fox annotated this photo in this way:

Near the launcher, there is a transloader vehicle which enables quick reloading of the missiles into the launcher. One of the bunker’s door is open, and another reloading vehicle is seen exiting from it.

[Fox:] The Iskander ballistic missile has a range up to 310 miles, and can carry both unconventional as well as nuclear warheads, putting most of America’s NATO allies at risk. The second deployment is near the border with Mongolia, in Ulan-Ude in Sothern Russia, where there are four launchers and another reloading vehicle.

[Fox:] Earlier this week, Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, said authorities of the former Soviet republic are being “controlled” by the West, warning it stands to lose its independence and identity as a consequence. “The continuation of such policy by the Kiev authorities can contribute to the loss of Ukraine’s statehood,” Mr Patrushev told Rossiyskaya Gazeta, according to Russian news agency TASS.

This situation was placed by Fox in context with the Kerch Strait incident, in which three Ukrainian vessels and twenty-four crew and soldiers were fired upon by Russian coast guard ships as they manuevered in the Kerch Strait without permission from Russian authorities based in Crimea. There are many indications that this incident was a deliberate attempt on the part of Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko, to create a sensational incident, possibly to bolster his flagging re-election campaign. After the incident, the President blustered and set ten provinces in Ukraine under martial law for 30 days, insisting to the world, and especially to the United States, that Russia was “preparing to invade” his country.

Russia expressed no such sentiment in any way, but they are holding the soldiers until the end of January. However, on January 17th, a Moscow court extended the detention of eight of these captured Ukrainian sailors despite protests from Kyiv and Washington.

In addition to the tensions in Ukraine, the other significant point of disagreement between the Russian Federation and the US is the US’ plan to withdraw from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Russia sees this treaty as extremely important, but the US point of view expressed by John Bolton, National Security Adviser, is that the treaty is useless because it does not include any other parties that have intermediate range nukes or the capability for them, such as Iran, North Korea, and China. This is an unsolved problem, and it is possible that the moves of the Iskander batteries is a subtle warning from the Russians that they really would rather the US stay in the treaty.

Discussions on this matter at public levels between the Russian government and the US have been very difficult because of the fierce anti-Russia and anti-Trump campaigns in the media and political establishments of the United States. President Putin and President Trump have both expressed the desire to meet, but complications like the Kerch Strait Incident conveniently arise, and have repeatedly disrupted the attempts for these two leaders to meet.

Where Fox News appears to get it wrong shows in a few places:

First, the known range for Iskander missiles maxes at about 310 miles. The placement of the battery near Krasnodar is 270 miles from the eastern Ukrainian border, but the eastern part of Ukraine is Russian-friendly and two provinces, Donetsk and Lugansk, are breakaway provinces acting as independent republics. The battery appears to be no threat to Kyiv or to that part of Ukraine which is aligned with the West. Although the missiles could reach into US ally Georgia, Krasnodar is 376 miles from Tbilisi, and so again it seems that there is no significant target for these missiles. (This is assuming the location given is accurate.)

Second, the location shown in the photo is (44,47,29.440N at 39,13,04.754E). The date on the “Krasnodar” photo is January 17, 2019. However, a photo of the region taken July 24, 2018 reveals a different layout. It takes a moment or two to study this, but there is not much of an exact match here:

Third, Fox News reported of “further Russian troops deployment and S-400 Surface to air missile days after the escalation started, hinting Russia might have orchestrated the naval incident.”

It may be true that Russia deployed weapons to this base area in Crimea, but this is now Russian territory. S-400s can be used offensively, but their primary purpose is defensive. Troops on the Crimean Peninsula, especially at this location far to the north of the area, are not in a position strategically to invade Kherson Oblast (a pushback would probably corner such forces on the Crimean peninsula with nowhere to go except the Black Sea). However, this does look like a possible defense installation should Ukraine’s forces try to invade or bomb Crimea.

Fox has this wrong, but it is no great surprise, because the American stance about Ukraine and Russia is similar – Russia can do no right, and Ukraine can do no wrong. Fox News is not monolithic on this point of view, of course, with anchors and journalists such as Tucker Carlson, who seem willing to acknowledge the US propaganda about the region. However, there are a lot of hawks as well. While photos in the articles about the S-400s and the Russian troops are accurately located, it does appear that the one about Iskanders is not, and that the folks behind this original article are guessing that the photos will not be questioned. After all, no one in the US knows where anything is in Russia and Ukraine, anyway, right?

That there is an issue here is likely. But is it appears that there is strong evidence that it is opposite what Fox reported here, it leaves much to be questioned.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Vladimir Putin calls new Ukrainian church ‘dangerous politicking’

President Putin said creation of the “Orthodox Church in Ukraine” is against Church canon and that the West drove Constantinople to do it.

Seraphim Hanisch



In an interview with the Serbian newspapers Politika and Vecernje Novosti ahead of his visit to Serbia, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted the creation of the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”, a schismatic agglomeration headed by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists was “dangerous politicking.” He further noted that:

The establishment of the new religious entity in Ukraine is nothing but an attempt “to legalize the schismatic communities that exist in Ukraine under the jurisdiction of Istanbul, which is a major violation of Orthodox canons.”

“Yet, hardly anyone in the U.S. or in the Ukrainian leadership worries about this,” Putin said.

“Once again, this has nothing to do with spiritual life; we are dealing here with dangerous and irresponsible politicking,” he said.

President Putin had more things to say in the interview, and we present what he said in full here (emphasis ours), as reported on the website:

Question: The Serbian Orthodox Church has taken the side of the Russian Orthodox Church in the context of the ecclesiastical crisis in Ukraine. At the same time, a number of countries are exerting pressure on Patriarch Bartholomew and seek to ensure recognition of Ukrainian ”schismatics“ by Local Orthodox Churches. How do you think the situation will evolve?

Vladimir Putin: I would like to remind your readers, who are greatly concerned about the information regarding the split in the Orthodox community but are probably not fully aware of the situation in Ukraine, what it is all about.

On December 15, 2018, the Ukrainian leaders, actively supported by the USA and the Constantinople Patriarchate, held a so-called “unifying synod”. This synod declared the creation of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, with Patriarch Bartholomew signing the tomos (decree) granting it autocephaly on January 6, 2019. Thus, it was attempted to legalize the schismatic communities that exist in Ukraine under the jurisdiction of Istanbul, which is a major violation of Orthodox canons.

Yet, hardly anyone in the US or in the Ukrainian leadership worries about this, as the new church entity is an entirely political, secular project. Its main aim is to divide the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, sowing seeds of ethnic as well as religious discord. No wonder Kiev has already declared ”obtaining complete independence from Moscow.”

Once again, this has nothing to do with spiritual life; we are dealing here with dangerous and irresponsible politicking. Likewise, we do not speak about the independence of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine. It is de-facto fully controlled by Istanbul. Whereas Ukraine’s largest canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which has never requested autocephaly from Patriarch Bartholomew, is absolutely independent in its actions. Its connection with the Russian Orthodox Church is purely canonical – but even this causes undisguised irritation of the current Kiev regime.

Because of this, clergymen and laymen of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church are being persecuted and deprived of churches and monasteries, and attempts are made to deny the Church its legitimate name, which raises tensions and only leads to further discord in Ukrainian society.

Evidently, Ukraine’s leaders have to understand that any attempts to force the faithful into a different church are fraught with grave consequences. Yet, they are eager to put interconfessional concord in the country at stake in order to conduct the election campaign of the current Ukrainian President based on a search for enemies, and to retain power by all means.

All of this does not go unnoticed by Orthodox Christians.

Naturally, Russia does not intend to interfere in ecclesiastical processes, especially those happening on the territory of a neighboring sovereign state. However, we are aware of the danger posed by such experiments and blatant interference of the state in religious affairs.

The situation continues to degrade in Ukraine, and though the Orthodox faithful of the Autonomous but Moscow-based Ukrainian Orthodox Church are the hardest hit, worry over Ukrainian lawlessless-made-law has the Jewish community in that country nervous as well. This is perhaps to be expected as the Azov Brigade, a neo-Nazi aligned group that is hypernationalist, is a good representation of the character of the “hate Russia at all costs” Ukrainian nationalists. A parallel piece in Interfax made note of this in a piece dated January 17th 2019:

[A] bill passed by the Verkhovna Rada introducing a procedure by which parishes can join the new Ukrainian church makes it easier to seize places of worship, and supporters of autocephaly have already started doing this across the country, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church said.

“They need this law to seize our churches. You can’t just come with a crowbar to someone else’s barn, but now the law allows you to do so. They aren’t creating something of their own, but are trying to steal what’s ours,” Ukrainian Orthodox Church spokesperson Vasyl Anisimov told Interfax on Thursday.

The religious entity set up in December with Constantinople’s involvement and called the Orthodox Church of Ukraine “in fact doesn’t yet exist in nature. It’s fake. It doesn’t have any parishes of its own or government registration,” he said.

However, “the supporters of autocephaly don’t have plans to create anything of their own at all, so they have chosen the path of takeover, and the authorities are helping them in that,” Anisimov said.

“Hence, the legislation passed by the Verkhovna Rada today is in fact absolute lawlessness,” he said.

“If you pass legislation affecting an industry, you should talk to industrialists, and if it’s legislation on the agricultural sector, talk to farmers. And here legislation on a church is passed, and moreover, this legislation is aimed against this church, it is protesting, and Jews are protesting, too, because this legislation may affect them as well – but nobody is listening, and they change the law for the sake of an absolutely absurd and unconstitutional gimmick. But, of course, it’s the people who will ultimately suffer,” Anisimov said.


Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter