Is Putin's move "clearing oligarchs" or "tearing down bridges"? In those days, a group of capital bosses came to power, but now they have sent these "old friends" to the trial bench one by one. Is this big drama in Russian politics about political cleansing or the overall situation of national governance? What does Putin's choice mean in this game of power and capital? What did it remind us?
Behind a "face-turning"
In the years when Putin first came to power, Russia's political stage seemed to be dominated by oligarchs.
These business giants, who hold the lifeblood of energy, media and finance, thought they could continue to speak with money, help them get on the horse, give them a ride, and get another piece of the pie. But as a result, they didn't expect that Putin was not here to continue to maintain the stability of this "alliance of powerful people", but to reshuffle the cards.
The first thing that feels bad is the media industry, a nationally influential television station, because of the continuous release of content that is inconsistent with the state position, the judicial department is struck, and then the control of equity is transferred to the hands of state-owned enterprises.
This action seems to be a commercial dispute, but it is actually the first step for the country to regain the dominance of public opinion. For Putin, the right to speak must be in the hands of the state, instead of letting a few capital bosses make irresponsible remarks with microphones.
Immediately afterwards, a "big earthquake" in the energy field came. Russia's largest private oil company has been accused of irregularities in the privatization process and is also suspected of large-scale tax evasion.
The person at the helm of the company was once a political celebrity, but failed to escape legal procedures, and the company's assets were eventually nationalized. Behind this game is the country's strong recovery of control over strategic resources and a deep "operation" on the influence of the oligarchic economy.
In this process, the judicial system has become a "surgical knife", with a legal basis, procedural justice, the financial problems are examined, the economic nerves are moved, but the political ecology is refactored.
The state re-establishes order in an institutional way, and "takes back" the fields that were originally touched by private capital one by one.
This is not a simple "turning against each other", but a choice to restrict and reorganize capital power under the background of safeguarding national sovereignty and security. Putin didn't "tear down the bridge", he just changed the original "bridge" leading to private interests into a "road" leading to national interests.
Reconstruction of the “National Will”
Then there was a qualitative shift in Russia's governance model.The past pattern of capital-dominated, political-business coalition was gradually replaced by the path of state-dominated, rule of law.
The legislature has intensively issued regulatory laws and regulations for economic activities, involving many key fields such as finance, energy, minerals, and media. The country is no longer just a "referee", but directly "plays off the court" and has more voice and decision-making power.
In addition to energy, industries such as metals and banking have also undergone restructuring. The state has comprehensively strengthened its control over the lifeline of the national economy by holding shares, sending directors and setting up regulatory agencies.
The core logic of this approach is clear, the state can not be in the key areas as a "guest", to be the "heart bone".
The change in the public opinion field also happened quietly, the mainstream media began to emphasize more "state position", when reporting major national security, foreign policy and social issues, unified calibre and unified direction.
This change is not to "suppress pluralism", but to maintain the overall social stability on the premise of ensuring the national unified public opinion position. After all, under the environment of increasing external pressure, a divided public opinion ecology is likely to become a "short board" of national security.
What is more noteworthy is that after these adjustments in Russian society, a consensus has gradually formed among political forces. Both opposition parties and local forces have shown different degrees of unity on issues involving the core interests of the country.
This capacity for internal coordination has become a “strategic resource” in the current complex international situation.
Behind these changes is a profound adjustment at the institutional level. Russia is not simply "changing a group of people to play old games", but trying to make the state machine more efficient and controllable through system design.
At the levels of political and business relations, resource management, social governance, etc., a complete set of "national centralization" operation mode has been established.
A warning to China.
Putin's series of operations, in the final analysis, is a "redefinition" of the boundaries of national governance. Capital is not unable to participate in national development, but it cannot override national interests.
In Russia's experience, if private capital controls the three lifeblood of public opinion, energy and finance, its influence on national security cannot be underestimated.
For China, behind this "bridge demolition" action, a structural risk is actually exposed. In the process of rapid economic development, if the system construction can't keep up, capital may form a monopoly force, thus affecting policy formulation, public opinion guidance, and even threatening national strategic security.
The Russian oligarchy phenomenon is a prequel.
More importantly, Russia takes the judiciary as the starting point, reshapes resource allocation, standardizes property order and rectifies the market environment. This way of "governance according to law" deserves our attention.
Instead of relying on an administrative order to cut off the chain of interests, we use a mature legal system to slowly "weave the net" so that capital can operate in an orderly manner within the legal framework.
Paying attention to the position of public opinion is an obvious signal. In the era of highly developed social media, the speed of information dissemination is far faster than the speed of governance response.
If the space of public opinion is manipulated by capital and even infiltrated by external forces, that “invisible risk” is more difficult to prevent than outward conflict.
Therefore, building a professional, authoritative and responsible news and public opinion system is not only for "propaganda", but also an integral part of national security.
In addition, the unity of Russian politics also reminds us. When facing external challenges, we must have a unified voice and action internally, and we must be able to form synergy in the core interests of the country.
Without a strong domestic consensus, it will be difficult to withstand the complex and ever-changing external environment.
Although Putin's operation of "clearing oligarchs" seems to be the concentration of personal power on the surface, it is more like a deep-seated system restoration from the perspective of national governance.
He is not demolishing bridges, but building roads, redirecting the original path leading to self-interest to the general direction of national interests.
It seems that Putin has turned his face to disregard, in fact, the real choice of the national interests priority. he brought up power with the rise of oligarchs, and with the means of the system to send the oligarchs out of the historical stage.
Russia's operation of "tearing down bridges across rivers" not only changed the fate of the country, but also reminded all developing countries that institutional design must precede capital expansion and national security must be higher than economic interests. For China, this lesson is worth pondering over again.