Medvedev–Putin tandemocracy

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Medvedev, Putin tandemocracy took its name from a constitutional roadblock. Russia's constitution barred Vladimir Putin from serving a third consecutive term as president. In 2008, instead of stepping away from government, Putin moved into the office of prime minister, while Dmitry Medvedev took the presidency. Commentators reached for a new word to describe the result: tandemocracy, built from "tandem," the interfix "-o-," and "-cracy," meaning rule. The label stuck because the arrangement raised an obvious question. Russia's constitution ranked the presidency above the premiership, so which of these two men, if either, was truly running the country between 2008 and 2012? Opinion on that question would split sharply, and split again, over the four years that followed.

• 2. The Handover

  ›

  Four Russian political parties lined up to nominate Dmitry Medvedev in the 2008 presidential race. He answered with a specific campaign promise: if elected, he would appoint Putin as prime minister. Voters delivered him the presidency with 73% of the vote, and Medvedev kept his word. The handover took place in May 2008. Soon, pollsters were putting a blunt question to ordinary Russians: which of the two actually ran the country.

• 3. What The Polls Showed

  ›

  By January 2009, opinion surveys put Putin's approval rating at 83%, ahead of Medvedev's 75%. The Levada Center asked Russians a direct question: who actually holds power in Russia? In January 2009-11% named Medvedev, 32% named Putin, 50% said both men shared it equally, and 7% did not know. A year earlier, before the election, the same question produced a different split. In February 2008-23% had named Medvedev, 20% had named Putin, 41% had said power was shared equally, and 16% gave no answer. Between those two polls, the share of Russians who saw Medvedev as the real leader roughly halved. Over the same stretch, Putin's own approval slid from 62% to 48%. These numbers didn't settle the argument. They handed commentators two competing cases to make.

• 4. Putin Was In Charge

  ›

  Nikolai Petrov, an analyst at the Carnegie Moscow Center, put it bluntly during the Russia-Ukraine gas dispute in early January 2009: "What we see right now is the dominant role of Putin. We see him as a real head of state.... This is not surprising. We are still living in Putin's Russia." Commentators, analysts and some politicians agreed through 2008 and into early 2009 on one point. The transfer of presidential powers on the 7th of May 2008 had been symbolic only. In their reading, Putin still sat atop Russia's real hierarchy of power, and Medvedev functioned as a figurehead, what one description called "Russia's notional president." On the 1st of February 2009, The International Herald Tribune offered a sharper twist on the same idea: "Putin is still considered Russia's paramount leader, but by taking the title of prime minister, he may have deprived himself of a fall-guy-in-waiting." The piece noted that role had traditionally gone to Russia's prime ministers. It pointed to Yeltsin, who had repeatedly dismissed his own prime ministers during the 1998 default. Instead of scapegoating a subordinate, the Tribune wrote, Putin blamed the United States for Russia's crisis rather than Moscow's heavy reliance on exporting natural resources. That reframing of blame hinted at a very different read on the arrangement, one that other commentators were building at the very same time.

• 5. A Shared Tandem

  ›

  Prior to the 2008 election, political scientists Gleb Pavlovsky and Stanislav Belkovsky sketched a different possibility altogether. Pavlovsky argued that Russians would welcome a Putin-Medvedev union akin to "the two Consuls of Rome," a shared command rather than a single ruler. Belkovsky went further, calling Medvedev the "president of a dream." That was a nod to the early 1990s, when people reportedly dreamed of a Russia where they "would live without the stranglehold of ubiquitous ideology, and a common person would become the head of the state." In August 2008, former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder gave Der Spiegel his own take: "President (Dmitry) Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin are addressing these problems, together, by the way, in friendship and mutual respect, not in competition with one another, as journalistic fortune-tellers often imply." At the end of 2008, the newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta ran an editorial titled "Tandem," arguing that Russia was genuinely led by both men together. It called it naive to ask which man mattered more, since Medvedev and Putin were, in its words, like-minded people facing different burdens. Medvedev was handling a crisis and a war, a tough spot for anyone trying to stay liberal. Putin, as head of government, carried responsibility for the economic fallout that was dragging down his own ratings. The editorial judged Putin the country's most experienced politician, still wielding immense influence. It saw no reason for either man to fear the future. Medvedev was a fast learner building his own team, backed by a constitution that favors the presidency. Nobody, meanwhile, could push Putin out of his post unless he chose to go. The same editorial flagged something new in Russian politics. The president was in no position to criticize the premier, the government or its ministers. In turn, the Duma could not criticize its own leader's cabinet. That structural quirk lasted until Putin returned to the presidency in the 2012 election.

• 6. Aftermath

  ›

  Putin won the 2012 election and returned to the presidency. Medvedev stepped into the prime minister's chair this time, reversing the roles the two men had held since 2008. A set of amendments passed in 2020, clearing a path for Putin to seek a third consecutive presidential term. He carried out that bid in the 2024 election. Medvedev, once the public face of the arrangement, ended up occupying the very post Putin had held throughout the tandem years.