Updated March 17, 2024 at 3:10 p.m.*
-Analysis-
Russians casting their votes in the presidential election on Sunday, the final day of the three-day ballot, they will find four names to choose from: Vladimir Putin — and three token alternative candidates: Nikolai Kharitonov from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Leonid Slutsky from the Liberal Democratic Party and Vladislav Davankov from the New People party.
Initially, the Central Election Commission rejected the candidacy of anti-war candidate Yekaterina Duntsova, and finally disqualified the sole remaining opposition candidate, Boris Nadezhdin.
Of course, the single most influential opposition figure of the past decade, who had tried in previous campaigns to run against Putin, was Alexei Navalny, who died suddenly on Friday at the age of 47 under suspicious circumstances at the northern Russian prison where he was serving long sentences on multiple trumped-up charges.
[shortcode-Subscribe-to-Ukraine-daily-box]
Before his death, Navalny had been relaying a message from prison urging Russians to gather at polling stations at 12:00 p.m. on March 17, the last day of voting. The initiative, dubbed “Protest Noon,” was conceived by former St. Petersburg Legislative Assembly deputy Maxim Reznik.
Reports from Moscow and elsewhere in Russia on Sunday showed signs that the protest began just before noon, as long lines suddenly formed at polling stations in an act of defiance against the Kremlin.
Navalny’s ally Ivan Zhdanov, in an interview with independent Russian news site Vazhnyye istorii several days before the opposition leader’s death, explained that the “mechanism” of a joint action at the polling places could be a powerful message. “The only way to demonstrate opposition to Putin, whether by voting for alternative candidates or spoiling ballots, is to gather in large numbers at polling stations. This will show that we are not a minority, that we are not merely a marginal anti-war group.”
But one day before the election begun, Vazhnyye istorii reported that the prosecutor’s office in Moscow has issued an official warning to those planning to take part in the protest. A statement said that participants could be prosecuted under Article 141 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison.
To be clear, when Russians go to the polls, there is no doubt who will win. This is not only because serious contenders have been excluded, and election results will go unmonitored, but because Putin remains widely popular in many regions as he effectively serves as a wartime president.
Indeed, as U.S.-based National Security Institute advisor Dmitri Alperovitch explained, Putin has seen the election as a chance to show Russians and the world just how popular he is, hoping for a high turnout and wide margin of victory. By all accounts, Putin would have wanted the election to run as smoothly as possible, which has now been put in jeopardy.
“The death of Navalny is not necessarily helpful to Putin,” Alperovitch told Australian public broadcaster ABC. “He wants to show the world he can get high sixties or seventies (of the vote) as a vindication of his hold on power and his popularity.”
Will it snowball?
Zhdanov portrays “Protest Noon” as an act of demonstration that aligns with other election strategies, including such acts of defiance as scribbling on ballots.
Before his death, Navalny sent a message relayed by his team on X: “Real people lining up to vote against Putin would be a powerful symbol against fraudulent yes votes.”
According to the Anti-Corruption Fund (FBK) director, the event’s purpose is to provide Russians with an opportunity to express solidarity and realize that they are not isolated. Furthermore, Zhdanov suggests that the action could showcase to the world the existence of another, anti-militarist segment of Russian society that has been silenced.
We can attempt to influence the impression that the election campaign leaves on the public.
Drawing from past protest election campaigns, Zhdanov anticipated a strong turnout for “Protest Noon.” He believes it’s feasible to rally “half a million people for this type of action in Moscow.” With 2,058 polling stations slated to open in Moscow, Zhdanov estimates an average of 250 opposition voters at each station simultaneously.
Political scientist Ekaterina Shulman emphasized that even in cases of predictable election outcomes under authoritarian regimes, the consequences of an electoral event always remain unpredictable.
“In this context, we can attempt to influence the consequences: the impression that the election campaign leaves on the public,” she explained. “Navalny’s call under these circumstances aligned more closely with political reality than other discussions on the topic.”
Inflating egos
Vladimir Milov, former Russian deputy energy minister in exile, and lawyer Vadim Prokhorov, director of the Free Russia Foundation both said that long queues outside polling stations on the last day at midday could show that they look empty on other days.
“The question of recognizing the legitimacy of the election is extremely important and sensitive for the Putin regime,” said Prokhorov, who defended imprisoned opponent Vladimir Kara-Murza, sentenced to 25 years in prison for state treason.
Given the anticipated widespread falsifications and the state’s tight control over the process, the public had been losing interest in both parallel vote counting and the election results themselves.
Nonetheless, with “Protest Noon,” voters still have the chance to demonstrate real dissent, as Shulman underscores: “This is not a game for results; this is a game for impressions. One photo [from the people near polling stations] weighs more than all the stats that they will show.”
If people vote against the main candidate, scribble on the ballots, or spoil them, it will make an impression.
Shulman suggests that such a demonstration of disagreement and the generally “unsmooth” course of the election campaign may reduce the likelihood of radical decisions after the elections.
“If everything goes smoothly for the authorities, their own success will inflate their egos after the elections,” she concludes. “However, if people vote against the main candidate, scribble on the ballots, or spoil them, it will make an impression on the election organizers. They may not inform the President about it, but those who withhold such information will still be aware and uneasy. By creating this impression, we don’t prevent, but we reduce the likelihood of post-election mobilization, border closures, and other unexpected actions that the authorities might undertake to celebrate.”
Better than boycott
The opposition’s declining frequency of calls for a boycott during recent presidential campaigns reflects a shift in strategy. With no lower threshold for turnout mandated by law and disruption of voting impossible (at least in theory), abstaining from voting appears less rational in modern Russia.
Independent electoral expert Roman Udot said that “If you don’t show up, the commissions will throw in a ballot for you, and you’ll have the same turnout, only with a bad result.” He further notes a lower media coverage of the election campaign compared to 2018, suggesting that authorities fear high turnout.
Shulman highlights that political struggle through non-participation in elections differs significantly from Russian tactics, which primarily involve participation within the existing electoral system.
The Iranian opposition has employed this strategy for years, claiming credit for a significant drop in turnout during the last presidential elections, from 73.3% in 2017 to 48.4% in 2021. Just a year later, large-scale and violent protests erupted.
“We will not participate in the elections to demonstrate a decline in support for the regime and compel it to resort to force,” says Shulman. “The regime will realize it lacks popular legitimacy, leading to increased repression and further erosion of public support. This approach may seem harsh, but it follows its own internal logic.”
This strategy is hardly applicable to Russia, she concludes. “It can only be effective if it leads to revolution, which requires millions of young people willing to be the driving force. In Russia, however, the population is predominantly older women, indicating no signs of a revolutionary situation.”
*Originally published February 17, 2023, this story was updated March 17, 2024, with new information related to the protest.
