Putin became a Russian president ten years ago. A bloody "Putin's era" began. The Editor-in-Chief of the Lithuanian magazine IQ.The Economist and a political scientist Vladimiras Laucius, does not see any positive results in policies pursued by Putin, and now by Medvedev and their clique, the Baltic news agency "Delfi" writes.

It was under Putin, and not in the 1990's, that an oligarchic system emerged in Russia, the main result of which became a further disintegration of public consciousness in Russian citizens.

In an interview with the Baltic news agency, the political scientist specifies:

  "Speaking about the political transformation of Russia after 1991, we are to remember that the system developed in Russia before Putin's rise to power, was called oligarchic. Berezovsky, Potanin, Gusinsky and other representatives of big business have been labeled "oligarchs". In fact, it was not the oligarchic system then, it appeared only under Putin.

  With Putin's coming to Kremlin, the power vertical strengthened and only then the system became oligarchic. It means that the ruling minority is placed above all, and their financial power, rather than some ideological features, has been formed.

  It is impossible to characterize the Putin's government as conservative, social democratic or liberal. It simply does not fit any ideological frameworks that exist in the West. In Russia, they have a group of comrades, who in addition to financial strength, increased the power vertical.

  The Putin's system is characterized primarily by the fact that the oligarchs are defined as representatives of big business. The second feature is a "war on terror". The word "terrorism" has become commonly used, it consistently appears in Putin's political rhetorics and speeches by his proxies.

  The 9/11 helped Putin's propaganda, an "anti-terrorist" propaganda, when they started to call "terrorism" the struggle for independence in Chechnya, which is NOT terrorism.

  Chechnya is one of the issues that are associated with the Putin's rise to power. Remember Putin's apartment bombings in Moscow and the renewal of war in Chechnya after this, following by its occupation and the creation of a puppet pro-Russian regime in Chechnya. All this took place under the slogan of "fighting terrorism", although the Chechen state had nothing to do with terrorism.

  In addition to "terrorism", a concept of "extremism" appeared, aimed at curbing criticism of government by Russian citizens. Somewhere in the middle of the past decade, the Putin's system finally took shape and began to enjoy a popular support.

  The Russian propaganda has traditionally focused on an "enemy". Image of an enemy was always present in Russia. In Soviet times, there was an enemy, and in Putin's times, enemies had to be invented. The old Soviet associations were revived. Such, for example, is an idea that the United States, as in Soviet times, is the main enemy of Russia in the West. The NATO in Kremlin's official documents has been called a threat to Russia.

  Russia went back to what has become customary for senior and middle-age generation. A threat from its neighbors, the countries of the former USSR, has completely been blended against this backdrop of threats from NATO. Of course, speaking about the Baltic countries, the emphasis is made on a "genocide of the Russian-speaking population".

  Russian policies always move in a direction that any sign of an independent policy from former members of the Soviet Union is immediately brandmarked as anti-Russian policy.

  It was easy to indoctrinate the Russian population. Russia was allegedly always surrounded by an enemy ring which became more dense with the help of NATO, and these Baltic countries are allegedly aggressive because they have some old scores. to settle with Russia. Under Putin, the above-mentioned cliches became one of the main lines of propaganda.

  The Putin's oligarchic system needs money here and now. This system fails to plan ahead. If the energy bubble burst, a revolt would happen in Russia, because of the short-sighted policy of the Russian authorities. And then the whole clique, led by Putin and Medvedev, will board a plane and fly to a country where they keep their money, and they will live quiet peacefully there.

  A certain role is played by Russian-Chinese relations. What is happening between Russia and China is a time bomb, which neither Putin nor Medvedev are going to deactivate. The mechanism continues to tick, and Russia is signing an agreement with China on energy supplies at low prices and in the amounts dictated by China. Russia is pretty often defeated in its relations with China. And this concerns its energy policy as well.

  One of the main positive results of Putin's rule is a further disintegration of Russian state identity in the minds of Russian population. The process that began in 1917 became irreversible, and those patriotic glimpses that we sometimes observe in Russia, as a result of Putin's propaganda, are very superficial.

  In 1918, there was a population who defended the country out of patriotic feelings. Now "Mother Russia" is defended by military commands, but not out of ideological considerations. There is no people now whose love for "Mother Russia" is strong enough to defend it from collapse.

  The current Russian regime is based on shifting sands, and holds due to its oligarchic nature: on the financial might and police force. It has no future.

  Energy prices again raised, which promises a few more years more of decent life for the representatives of the regime. If can use the words decent life for indecent persons.

  Russia balances on a brink of the complete renunciation of a civilized policy. I would not say that this policy has any positive aspects at all.

  I simply do not see them. Keeping in mind that any civilized society is a political society, it must be admitted that it is very difficult characterize modern Russian politics as positive. Of course, if we do not consider the situation from the viewpoint of the ruling regime.