cracks in the kremlin --6/9/25

09 Jun 2025

cracks in the kremlin --6/9/25

0 COMMENTS

Today's selection-- from Patriot by Alexei Navalny. How Alexei Navalny and his team used tactical voting to challenge Vladimir Putin’s ruling party.

“In Russia, power doesn't change because of elections. This was a phrase I used in an interview in 2011. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that in the buildup to elections the public's attention is focused on politics, and we have to make use of that. Moreover, at such a time the authorities are always very vulnerable. We saw this in 2011, when United Russia won the parliamentary elections thanks to vote rigging, and this immediately led to mass protests.

“That same year, I called on voters to choose any party except United Russia. In 2018, after I was prevented from running in the presidential election, the boycott of the election I called for drew a great deal of criticism from those who thought that my position was inconsistent. In fact, it was totally logical. We should always use elections to do as much damage as possible to the Kremlin.

“At the end of 2018 we came up with a new strategy: tactical voting. By this method we hoped to destroy United Russia's monopoly on power, which had never been done before. The candidate from Putin's party always garnered at least 25 to 30 percent of the vote, the rest being split between the various representatives of the ‘systemic opposition.’ The Kremlin zealously ensured that these candidates didn't make any deals among themselves. They would spark disagreements between the candidates ahead of the elections, and they would divide up constituencies. Everyone wanted to be in ‘a good constituency,’ which immediately led to a number of opposition candidates in the central regions taking votes from each other, thus helping the election of the United Russia candidate. So if the politicians are unable to agree among themselves, let the voters agree.

“The idea was that we would select the second-strongest candidate and call on everyone to vote for him or her, putting aside ideological differences. We determined who that was by analyzing the results of recent elections and considering the opinion of local political experts. In nearly every case, the second-strongest candidate was a Communist. I have written here things that show clearly that I don't love the Communists, but now we were in a different situation. It wasn't that I wanted to see the Communists win; I wanted the defeat of United Russia.

Navalny at a Moscow rally, 10 March 2012

“In the summer of 2019 we tried out the idea of tactical voting in the elections for the Moscow City Duma. I wasn't able to run in these elections, but many of my colleagues and supporters could. We announced our plan a few months before the election and received strong support. Of course, there were also those who were unhappy about it: ‘I've been voting for the Yabloko party for twenty years, and I will continue to vote for Yabloko come what may!’ ‘Vote for the Communists! For those cannibals! Never!’ I explained that we were in a position whereby you could vote for a chair; even that would be better than the United Russia candidate. My next argument was that the more non-United Russia delegates there were in the parliament, the bolder these candidates would be.

“The Kremlin quickly realized that our tactic was popular and that they were facing a defeat in the autumn. So they used their tried-and-true method: they banned the most popular candidates from running. In fact, they arrested the majority of them for a month (some for even longer).

“The independent candidates fought until the end, among them, Lyubov Sobol. When the officials did not register her candidacy for the elections, she declared a hunger strike and wouldn't leave the electoral commission. The video clip of her being carried out of the building sitting on the sofa that she had refused to leave became the symbol of this campaign.

“A couple of months earlier, people were bored by the elections for the Moscow City Duma. Now, they attracted the attention of the whole country. The mass banning of independent candidates led to huge street protests in Moscow. Some of those participating faced criminal charges, mainly under the article ‘threatening the health of a policeman.’ Throwing an empty plastic cup at a riot cop was considered an example of that. These demonstrations proved to be an important milestone in the history of protest in Russia, not only because new people joined in, but because of the increased cruelty of repression. In 2017 you could receive fifteen days in detention for taking part in a demonstration. In 2018, this had increased to thirty days. Starting in 2019, you risked spending years in jail.

“The elections took place in September. Even though they had banned genuine candidates, tactical voting worked. The number of deputies from Putin's party fell from forty to twentyfive. We even succeeded in kicking out the head of United Russia in Moscow. We also managed to elect a few genuine opposition deputies, who now would openly criticize both the mayor of Moscow and Putin from the floor of the capital's parliament. Some totally unsuspecting candidates who had been put on the ballot in the hope that they would dilute the protest vote were as shocked by their success as we were (that is how tactical voting works). But just as I had hoped, the Moscow City Duma was now made up of a completely different set of deputies. Nothing was left of United Russia's monopoly, and the ‘systemic’ opposition spoke with an ever-louder voice.

“I learned about all this from the radio. The prison radio. Once again I had been arrested, as now happened after every demonstration, but I was delighted. Since tactical voting worked in Moscow, we could repeat it across Russia. Elections for regional parliaments were due to take place in Siberia the following summer, and in a year there were elections for the State Duma.

“We prepared for the Siberian campaign for almost a year. I flew there in the summer of 2020 in order to deal the decisive blow of the campaign-to film our investigations in Novosibirsk and Tomsk. Everything went very well, and we made our recordings. On the evening of August 19, I went into the restaurant of the hotel where our team was staying. The restaurant closed early, but my colleagues, who had already managed to have supper, persuaded the kitchen to stay open a little longer so I could order something to eat. ‘Actually,’ I said, ‘I won't have anything to eat, because my plane leaves very early in the morning. I'll just have a quick drink with you, then go to bed.’ Behind the bar was a new and strange-looking bartender who seemed to be staring at me very attentively. The day before someone else had been on duty. I assumed it was just a different shift. ‘I'll have a Negroni, please,’ I told the waiter, and forgot about the guy behind the bar. When I was brought the cocktail, it tasted so foul that I couldn't have more than one swig. Something went through my mind again about the strange-looking bartender, who somehow didn't look like he belonged. I left the drink, said good night to everyone, and went up to my room.

“August 20, 2020. The alarm clock goes off at 5:30 a.m. I wake without effort and make my way to the bathroom. I take a shower. I do not shave. I brush my teeth. The roll-on deodorant is empty. I rub the dry plastic over my armpits before discarding the applicator in the trash basket, where it will be discovered a few hours later by my colleagues when they come to search the room.

“I'm afraid I might be late for the plane.”