What if Yeltsin does not fire upon the Duma (90s Russia)

[sampleswift]

Yeltsin firing upon the Duma (1993) was considered a critical error that may have ruined democracy in Russia. Could Russian Democracy have still survived had he not done that? (and a real democracy, not the illusion of choice post-2004)? Would Vladimir Putin have risen to power in that timeline? How would the world change?
The answer I got from Reddit was (credit to abbathehorse)

If Yeltsin had backed down during the constitutional crisis, it's likely that Russia could have become a parliamentary republic rather than the strong president system Russia developed into.

With Yeltsin's power being limited, the pace of the 'shock therapy' being implemented in Russia would have slowed and may even have partially reversed. This would weaken the oligarchs as they began to emerge, and reduce the rise in extreme poverty Russia saw in this period.

As a result, there is less Soviet nostalgia, meaning that the refounded Communist Party is less successful in the 1995 legislative elections, with more moderate parties on the left being the main beneficiaries. A weaker Communist party combined with the reduced powers of the president means leads to the USA being less concerned about the result of the 1996 presidential election, meaning that they do not intervene so Yeltsin is voted out. Without Yeltsin's patronage, Vladimir Putin does not rise to power as he did in real life, although he may still be a major politician within one of Russia's conservative parties or electoral alliances (depending on how the political system in Russia develops).

Anyone else have ideas? I'd like to have more input.

 

[Borya]

I would still live in Russia. My mom did not have enough arguments to move to USA before I get involved in events

 

[realgone2]

I was there. Right across the street on the American embassy compound. I was 13. Craziest thing I've ever seen in my life. If you'd like I can tell you my version of events.

 

[GauchoBadger]

Perhaps a more economically and politically stable Russia could have applied for stronger ties with the European Union and the west, and maybe even joined the EU at a later date with its own conditions?

 

[sampleswift]

Thanks for the feedback.

Perhaps a more economically and politically stable Russia could have applied for stronger ties with the European Union and the west, and maybe even joined the EU at a later date with its own conditions?

I don't know. More politically stable/less authoritarian might have been able to pass the EU democratic restrictions. Now economic stability,
Also, Russia might not even want to join the EU tbh. Many in Russia wanted Russia to be a leader, not a member of a larger organization. Revanchism (due to collapse of the USSR and the Soviet sphere), I think is still present. Now Yeltsin backing off does help with the democracy part, definitely. Economics, maybe that would have helped. I'd say 90s Russia was very politically unstable but that's almost a given for new countries.

 

[sampleswift]

If Yeltsin does not fire upon the Duma/The 1993 Constitutional Crisis doesn't get as awful as it did OTL, I do see democracy in better shape than it was OTL; whether that translates to economic/political stability really depends on several factors. I think it depends on the economic policies of the political parties of Russia (whiplash between parties due to radically different economic viewpoints might reduce economic stability for example.) Political stability--I'd say this is always going to be not very high in a nascent democracy. That being said, what Yeltsin did OTL was inexcusable. Would that improve EU-Russia relations? I'd say survival of democracy in Russia definitely would help. Then again, democracy would still be under threat if a radical party (left or right--did 1996 Zyuganov count as radical/dangerous to democracy?) presidential candidate won, or if revanchism (like 2000-onward Putin) reemerged.

 

[Greg Grant]

My view: it all goes to shit anyway. The very things that made it possible for Yeltsin to fire on the Duma and the very things that made Yeltsin feel he was compelled to do it would not have disappeared. There would have been other flashpoints. There would have been another strongman showing up with either epaulets full of stars, a pint sized afterbelch of KGB or some cabal of likeminded technocrats. The issue of the stability of democracy rests on the perception of democracy.

To most of us in the Western world, democracy has positive connotations because we associate it with prosperity, liberty and pursuit of a good way of life. United States was founded on it, and to those of us who call ourselves Americans, we see at its core democracy as our birthright and our birth, something so essential to our identity we call on it like a mystical beacon of hope. Yeltsin's Russia was built on the shattered remains of the Soviet empire. To many there, democracy was viewed dimly because democracy did not come to Russia at its moment of greatness, but at its perceived lowest point. Think Wiemar Republic. Add to it that Russia's previous democratic experiment also came at the end of the Russian Empire. Hell, the very concept of Duma with its historical antecedent of poor doomed Constitutional Democrats in three piece suits with tails debating the finer points of Russian future as drunken sailors and leather jacketed goons with broomhandle revolvers storm inside and show 'em how it's really done did not exactly point to a bright and happy future.

Yeltsin could wipe his ass with the Constitution, because it ultimately did not matter to the man on the street. Until it is made to matter to that man on the street, it would have been just another set of cheeks being wiped at a later date.

 

[Aber]

Yeltsin firing upon the Duma (1993) was considered a critical error that may have ruined democracy in Russia. Could Russian Democracy have still survived had he not done that? (and a real democracy, not the illusion of choice post-2004)? Would Vladimir Putin have risen to power in that timeline? How would the world change?
The answer I got from Reddit was (credit to abbathehorse)

If Yeltsin had backed down during the constitutional crisis, it's likely that Russia could have become a parliamentary republic rather than the strong president system Russia developed into.

With Yeltsin's power being limited, the pace of the 'shock therapy' being implemented in Russia would have slowed and may even have partially reversed. This would weaken the oligarchs as they began to emerge, and reduce the rise in extreme poverty Russia saw in this period.

As a result, there is less Soviet nostalgia, meaning that the refounded Communist Party is less successful in the 1995 legislative elections, with more moderate parties on the left being the main beneficiaries. A weaker Communist party combined with the reduced powers of the president means leads to the USA being less concerned about the result of the 1996 presidential election, meaning that they do not intervene so Yeltsin is voted out. Without Yeltsin's patronage, Vladimir Putin does not rise to power as he did in real life, although he may still be a major politician within one of Russia's conservative parties or electoral alliances (depending on how the political system in Russia develops).

This is simply bollocks; I was in Moscow at the time.

The key point is that the Congress of People's Deputies was elected in March 1990 and reflected the power structures of that time. It was not a body interested in democracy. The April 1993 referendum (Da, Da, Nyet, Da) gave Yeltsin the popular mandate to take on the Congress.

The trend to violence started with backers of the Congress trying to seize the main television station, taking it off air. That evening there was chaos eg the St Petersburg channel was reduced to reporting rumours from Moscow, including tanks on the street.

Despite Yeltsin winning there was still huge enthusiasm for the Communist Party and the Soviet past - Yeltsin's re-election in 1996 was not certain, and the worst of the oligarch abuses (shares for loans) happened in the run-up to this; partly to help the government pay pensions etc and partly to dismantle state businesses in case the Communists won.

1994 was probably the most optimistic time in Russia - the Soviet dinosaurs had been defeated and a true multi-party democracy seemed a real possibility. But then things turned sour - including the botched invasion of Chechnaya.

 

[realgone2]

This is simply bollocks; I was in Moscow at the time.

The key point is that the Congress of People's Deputies was elected in March 1990 and reflected the power structures of that time. It was not a body interested in democracy. The April 1993 referendum (Da, Da, Nyet, Da) gave Yeltsin the popular mandate to take on the Congress.

The trend to violence started with backers of the Congress trying to seize the main television station, taking it off air. That evening there was chaos eg the St Petersburg channel was reduced to reporting rumours from Moscow, including tanks on the street.

Despite Yeltsin winning there was still huge enthusiasm for the Communist Party and the Soviet past - Yeltsin's re-election in 1996 was not certain, and the worst of the oligarch abuses (shares for loans) happened in the run-up to this; partly to help the government pay pensions etc and partly to dismantle state businesses in case the Communists won.

1994 was probably the most optimistic time in Russia - the Soviet dinosaurs had been defeated and a true multi-party democracy seemed a real possibility. But then things turned sour - including the botched invasion of Chechnaya.

This is all correct. My father was a defense attache for the Navy. I remember him and several other people with Ambassador Pickering in our house (because you could see what was going on from the roof of our townhouse. The back was diagonally across from the Duma.) using our phone to talk to people in DC. They were going to evac all dependents and non essential personnel via helicopter to the airport and then to Germany. DC didn't want to do that because it would show that the U.S. didn't have faith in the new Russian government to handle the situation. I still remember the elderly protesters in front of the embassy yelling "Yankee Go Home!". They kinda disappeared by late 94-early 95