The "Putin Must Go!" Petition (Full Translation)
16 Mar 2010
Originally published on Ежедневный Журнал’s website on March 11, 2010, the liberal opposition has drafted a petition calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. At the time that I publish this blog post, the signatures total is at 9,962 (access to this site, by the way, has been spotty — thanks to DoS attacks, according to the press). I haven’t been able to find an English-language translation of the text (though RFE/RL discusses it here), so I went ahead and did it myself. (Note: I stopped looking for a translation once I resolved to do this, so it’s more than possible that my work has since been rendered redundant.)
It’s worth pointing out that many of the signatures are from Russians living outside the Russian Federation. Many others don’t reveal their location, at all.
Aaaanyway, without further ado …
“Putin Must Go!” An Appeal
Citizens of Russia! The realization that our country finds itself – thanks to the ruling elite – in a blind alley has driven us to publish this appeal.
Seeking a guarantee on their private security, [Yeltsin and his] “family” surrendered virtually unlimited power over Russia to a person of dubious reputation, distinguished by neither talent nor the necessary life and professional experience, and, as a result, we witnessed a sharp degradation of all state institutions.
A significant number of the ruling “elite” already senses this urgency – we need only recall that sensational opus “Russia, Forward!” However, Medvedev’s modernization project is clearly just for show and serves a singular purpose: to refresh the scenery but protect the regime’s true authoritarian, kleptocratic nature.
We maintain that the ruinous Russian socio-political structure, which today is imposed on the citizens of our country, has — as its chief architect, curator, and keeper — a single person. His name is Vladimir Putin.
We maintain that there can be no reforms in Russia today, while Putin commands the real power in the country.
We maintain that the dismantling of the Putin regime and the rerouting the country to a path of democratic development can only begin when Putin loses his grip on the levers of the state and society.
We maintain that, during the years of his rule, Putin has become a symbol of ruthlessness against his own citizens in a country increasingly corrupt and unpredictable — a country whose citizens have no rights and are overwhelmingly poor, where there are no ideals and there is no future.
If, as Kremlin propagandists love to repeat, Russia under Yeltsin was on its knees, Putin and his entourage have put Russia’s face in the mud.
In a mud of the authorities’ contempt that lacks not only individual rights and freedoms, but human life itself.
In a mud of fake and helpless imitations of political and social institutions – from the bureaucratic phantom of “United Russia” to the Nashi-Putinistas.
In a mud of hearts and minds corrupted by deceptive television, which has turned one of the most educated peoples in the world into a soulless, amoral crowd.
In a mud of total theft and corruption, flowing from the very heights of the government. Without Putin’s many years of heroic self-sacrifice at the state’s helm, we wouldn’t have the financial empires of his billionaire friends – Abramovch, Timchenko, Koval’chukov, Rotenberg. We wouldn’t have the parasitic state corporations of his inner circle – those black holes of the Russian economy.
Having begun his rise with the memorable phrase “bump them off in the shithouse,” Putin for nearly 11 years has relied on this universal “tool” of governance, which has proved especially effective in relations with political opponents and business competitors.
Any political, social, or economic dissent is immediately suppressed – in the best case, with administrative restrictions, but often with the nightsticks of riot police, criminal harassment, physical violence, and even murder. On this score, Putin has proved that he will destroy his opponents with any means available.
In the time Putin has led the government, everything that had even the possibility of failing has been defeated. Pension and administrative reforms were shot down; reforms in the army, the special forces, the police, and the court systems did not pass; and the national healthcare system remains in a pitiful state.
The decline of education and science, abandoned to the mercy of traders from the “Ozero” corporation, has reached such a level that the “titans” of Russian scientific thought decided it just to include characters like Pyotr and Gryzlov.
Ten years have been frittered away, when a boom in the prices of hydrocarbons and metals could have been used to modernize the country and effect structural changes in the economy. For this reason, Russia suffered such a severe blow from the world [economic] crisis, which is far from over.
As the designated successor to Yeltsin, Putin has not only failed to correct the disastrous mistakes of his predecessor and put out the fire in the Caucasus, but he managed to turn it into something far worse that could very well break apart the country.
“Kursk,” “Nord-Ost,” Beslan, thousands killed in the sectarian second Chechen War, thousands dead from man-made disasters — burned alive in nursing homes and hospitals unsuitable for habitation, dozens of murdered journalists, human rights workers, political opponents of the regime, and the faceless victims of sadistic police mayhem – all are tombstones demarcating Putin’s rule.
The unsolved mysteries surrounding the Putin regime’s beginnings remain Basaev’s incursion into Dagestan, the apartment bombings in Moscow and Volgodonsk, and the “exercises” in Ryazan.
Putin’s inability to think strategically no longer surprises anyone. He could not anticipate what the world would be like in ten-to-fifteen years, or what place in this changing world Russia could or should occupy. He was unable to assess the real threats and risks facing the country, and therefore not in a position to properly plan the country’s possible direction (or identify potential allies and enemies).
A vivid illustration of such shortsighted policy is the recent capitulation of an agreement with China, with which Putin carelessly signed over vast sums of the Russian Far East and Eastern Siberia.
Also demonstrating Putin’s poor understanding of the future is his maniacal passion for laying gas pipes in every which direction, initiating ambitious, expensive projects (like the Sochi Olympics or the bridge to “Russia” island) that are absolutely counterintuitive in a country where a significant part of the population lives below the poverty line.
Moving from the president’s seat to the prime minister’s chambers, leaving in the Kremlin one of his obedient lieutenants (of his own “blood type”) – a modern Simeon Bekbulatovich – Putin has created an openly anti-constitutional system, where his term is for-life.
Clearly, Putin will never voluntarily give up power. His determination to rule for life is driven less by a thirst for power, and more by a fear of being held responsible for his actions. For the Russian people, it is humiliating (and for the country, it is deathly dangerous) to have a ruler like Putin. Russia cannot continue to bear this cross.
As it loses ground, Putin’s faction could at any moment expand its targeted repressions to a mass repression. We caution the employees of law enforcement organs and security agencies: do not go against your own people, and do not obey the criminal orders of the corrupt, when they send you to kill for the likes of Putin, Sechin, and Deripaska.
Today, the nation-wide demands at protests from Vladivostok to Kaliningrad should adopt the following slogan: “Putin, Leave!” Eliminating Putinism is the first [difficult], but necessary, step towards a new free Russia.



Mar 16, 2010 @ 15:32:22
The very fact that they’ve published it and thousands of people have signed it doesn’t help their assertion that, “any political, social, or economic dissent is immediately suppressed.”
I’m curious about EJ (EZh?, DJ? … whatever we can call it) and its readership. It’s an opposition paper, but what is the reputation in Russia? Is it considered a serious, elitny outlet for a minority group of impotent intellectuals (the Nation might be a comparison) or a more hysterical tabloid out to whip up a frenzy, facts be damned, Tea Party-like? Is their goal to inform or to influence?
I’m struck by how little attention is given to wonky, political, factual grievances or context and how much this petition relies on a vague accusations, poetic language and narrative building. It could hypthetically be a winning strategy, but is it a responsible one? And there is no “then what?” I actually DO want to understand. I’m just not getting enough information from them in the way of verifiable evidence of their claims or explanations of what they would do differently.
Also, and I say looking back on the Bush years: if it’s that bad, it’s never because of one individual. It’s systemic, cultural … No one person actually has complete control (not even Putin – and I think his critics are as culpable in the creation of cult of personality as his supporters in this respect). Not even in Russia. And the “anybody but…” platform is a losing one. Sane people want at a minimum someone perceived as an improvement.
Mar 16, 2010 @ 16:41:16
I’ve heard people call it “ёж,” as in ёжик (I guess).
To my knowledge, it’s very widely read and cited by Russian experts outside Russia, namely because all their liberal buddies publish there. Just look at the list of authors and it’s no wonder why the “opinion-making elite” love this site:
So, in the vein of marginalized intellectuals, the Nation is probably the better comparison, though — in keeping with Russia’s generally weak journalistic standards — ЕЖ runs some pretty off-the-wall, poorly edited filth, too. (I believe Sean once described it as “a liberal rag.”)
As for their lack of substance in both their criticisms of Putin and their offered solutions: yep.
Mar 16, 2010 @ 16:54:23
Yeah I’ve checked out their editorial staff and contributors. I know who is behind it – I was just wondering who *in* Russia reads it, and how serious its repution is.
Mar 17, 2010 @ 07:10:10
This doesn’t exactly explain its influence or seriousness, but here’s a chart showing ЕЖ’s visitor traffic:
http://nova.top100.rambler.ru/resStats/287193/?_page=6
It ranks #5 in Russia for news about the government and society:
http://nova.top100.rambler.ru/navi/?theme=115
(The second place spot belongs to the official state newspaper, Российская газета.)
Jun 21, 2010 @ 17:17:13
Rambler? That’s a catalogue, not a rating:) It’s only measuring itself, and it’s own users, which are quite non-representative, taking into account the percentage and profile of people using it.
Better use Alexa, if you want to really measure anything online.
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/ej.ru#
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/ej.ru#
There you can also compare to any other major political news site.
Mar 16, 2010 @ 15:46:47
The constant reference to Yeltsin is enough reason why this petition has only 10 000 signatures approximately.
Mar 17, 2010 @ 11:08:54
I think they’ve actually capitualated some on Yeltsin. They mention only his mistakes: appointing Putin and botching the Chechen War.
As for their little quip about “Russia on its knees” vs. “face in the mud,” I actually thought that was somewhat clever (though the repetition thereafter of what constitutes that mud was pretty atrocious writing).
Mar 16, 2010 @ 20:18:08
Thanks for getting this out. Being nothing more than an extended “We hate Putin!” spew, it reveals that the authors have no concept of how to govern in his place. The more people see this, the better
Mar 16, 2010 @ 22:35:40
Very good work on translating this.
I’m still not 100% convinced this petition isn’t actually some very excellent Kremlin black PR, but if everyone here insists it’s genuine I suppose I’ll go along.
Part of me wants to get really fired up and do a (hopefully) humorous take-down of the folks who wrote this, but by this point in time Russian liberals bore me more than anything else. This petition reeks of every sort of intellectually lazy and trite anti-Putin vacuousness you could possibly imagine, and reads more like some middling crap that a bunch of overeager 20 year olds running a college newspaper would churn out than like the sober musings of Russia’s intellectual elite.
So yeah, to sum things up, if this is the best that Russia’s “opposition” can do, Vlad must be quite sanguine about his future prospects.
Mar 17, 2010 @ 07:01:14
I agree that this is clearly something peripheral, written with the sort of bombast that is the political equivalent of “straight to video.”
Interesting idea that it’s actually Kremlin-engineered. What’s the most prominent black PR to date?
This petition is being promoted by ЕЖ and Солидарность, so my assumption is that it’s for-serious. Ilya Yashin has been practically begging his blog’s readers to go sign it.
The DC literati are obviously super jazzed about this kind of thing. After the “earth-shaking” Kaliningrad rallies (with one more to come), and the regional elections that “devastated” United Russia (i.e., slightly reduced its margins of overwhelming electoral victory everywhere except Irkutsk), this petition will likely be heralded as the beginning of the end.
I can’t wait to see what the next ‘beginning of the end’ will be.
Mar 17, 2010 @ 00:47:45
Putin must stay! He is the only true leader. The west, namely the USA, NATO and the UK are evil and must be crushed. Putin is the only man that can achive this!
Mar 17, 2010 @ 06:49:47
Whoa there, Michael. I’m sure we’re more than capable of crushing ourselves.
Russia’s economy is going to recover, and its political system will not change - Mark Adomanis - On Russia - True/Slant
Mar 18, 2010 @ 10:47:51
[...] society is mobilizing: a few scatered marches, some angry jeremiads on Echo Moskvy, and a petulant petition in Ezhednevny Zhurnal, are not going to cut [...]
Mar 20, 2010 @ 21:31:58
But the content of this article is pretty much standard for any politic in opposition. You can read what says Segolene Royal in LeFigaro (France), or you can read what says Chineey Dick
in US. – The content is redundantly standard and no bearing on factual material whatsoever.
Mar 22, 2010 @ 19:05:56
Like the Дума, petitions are no place for debates.
Russia’s Public Petitions: By the People, But for Whom? · Global Voices
Mar 05, 2013 @ 20:22:36
[...] see how these new Internet-petitions work. Given the multiple filters in place, one doubts that any “Putin Must Go” initiatives will reach the parliament floor. More likely, perhaps, is that the Kremlin will gain a new means of [...]
Russia’s Public Petitions: By the People, But for Whom? | Ramy Abdeljabbar's Palestine and World News
Mar 07, 2013 @ 20:00:33
[...] how these new Internet-petitions work. Given the multiple filters in place, one doubts that any “Putin Must Go” initiatives [19] will reach the parliament floor. More likely, perhaps, is that the Kremlin will gain a new [...]