More on the possibility of a third term in office for Putin

Last week, there was a lot of talk about an initiative by regional deputies in Primor'e to amend the constitution to remove the term limit on the Russian presidency (I covered the story here, here, here, and here). As it turns out, there was another, similar initiative originating outside of Russia's capital last week. Mosnews has the basic story:

St. Petersburg Lawmaker Suggests Constitution Amendment Allowing Third Term for Putin
Created: 12.08.2005 14:42 MSK

Lawmaker of the St. Petersburg Legislative Assembly has brought in an initiative to change the Russian Constitution provisions on the third presidential term.

Igor Rimmer made a project of a bill on an amendment to the Constitution in order to increase the terms of the Russian president's authorities.

Rimmer's version of this amendment reads that "one and the same person cannot hold the post of the Russian president for more than three consecutive terms,"; Interfax news agency reported. Currently, it is impossible for a person to be president for more than two terms in a row. Vladimir Putin's second term expires in March 2008. [...]

Putin has recently said that he “maybe would like to” (run for president in 2008) but the Constitution did not permit to do so.

The only problem with this story is the last paragraph. If you look at the statement which Putin made recently (on August 2nd while on a visit to Finland - the full transcript of the press conference is available on the Kremlin's website here in English and here in Russian) and read it without too much cynicism - with less cynicism than I usually apply to Russian official statements, and less cynicism than I was applying to the Primor'e story last week - it seems like the response of someone who is not necessarily focused on serving a third term in office:

QUESTION: This is a question for President Putin. Your presidential term comes to an end in 2008. There has been plenty of speculation that you would like to stay in office beyond this date. Could you say something about your plans for the future?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Perhaps I would like to stay in office, but our country’s constitution does not allow it. I think that what is most important for Russia today is stability, and we can achieve this stability only by respecting the laws that are in force and abiding by the constitution’s provisions. 2008 is still quite a long way off and I am sure that there is still much work to do [...]

So, possibly these regional deputies are loose cannons not encouraged by anyone in Moscow, and Putin is genuinely ambivalent about a third term. Pravda.ru has a somewhat lucid explication of this point of view:

Fabricating Vladimir Putin's third term in the office of the Russian President
Ivan Shmelev, 08/13/2005 14:46

The subject surfaced in Russian political discussions again, when a Finnish journalist asked Putin this question during his visit to Finland in the beginning of August. "Maybe I would like to, but the Constitution of Russia does not allow me to do it. I believe that stability is most important factor in present-day Russia, which can be achieved on the base of constitutional regulations," the head of state answered. Vladimir Putin stated back on 9 December 2003 that it was about time one should put an end to the rumors about the need to change the Constitution. [...]

Provocative initiatives continued stirring up the general public anyway. A member of the St.Petersburg Legislative Assembly, Igor Rimmer, developed a new project to amend the Russian Constitution, in which one and same person would not be allowed to take the post of the president for more than three terms in a row. The Central Electoral Committee rejected the initiative as well.

Despite the negative remarks from the committee and from the president himself, the Russian media decided to misinterpret the story and say that Putin would agree to change the Constitution. Furthermore, they believed that Putin would forget about the fact that only the next president would have a chance to use adequate amendments, if they were ever be introduced.

It is enough to look at the headlines, which certain media outlets used for their articles and reports: "Vladimir Putin wants to remain the president for the third time," - Echo of Moscow radio station; "Putin would like to keep presidency after 2008," - Gazeta.Ru. News headlines from Itar-Tass and RIA Novosti are a lot more peaceful against such a background: "Putin: The Constitution does not allow me to stay after 2008." Not even a word about the third term. [...]

Dwelling upon Vladimir Putin's third term on the position of the Russian president, Western journalists either forget, or are not willing to recollect the fact that such initiatives periodically occurred in the USA. Russia borrowed the USA's idea about the right for one and the same person to hold the four-year presidency twice in a row. When Ronald Reagan was elected president for the second time (1985-1988), many American scientists of politics set forth a suggestion to change the Constitution and let Mr. Reagan work for another four years.

President Putin has not made any statements about the third term. When someone uses the words of a deputy to prove the opposite, one should view such situation as a political provocation. If the words of all US congressmen were made a reality, the world would be waging World War VI nowadays.

I think the truth, as is so often the case, lies somewhere between the two versions of this story which are floating around. I doubt that the initiatives from Primor'e and St. Petersburg are part of a coordinated plan to get the ball rolling on a constitutional amendment; however, it's obvious that Putin and his inner circle are giving thought to who will run the country after 2008 and that one of the options is to leave the current president in office, which they could do in several different ways. Most likely, the country's leadership simply hasn't made up its mind (1) whether it's necessary or desirable for Putin to remain the country's leader after 2008, and (2) if it is, how best to make this happen. The one thing that is clear is that we'll hear lots more speculative coverage on this story (not necessarily the specific initiatives, but the larger question) before everything is said and done.