Basic competency in governance is by no means a given in a democracy.  Any visitor to the New York State Legislature could tell you that.  But conversely, authoritarianism does not always function as the perfect conveyor belt of executive decision making, and the “power vertical” of Russia’s ruling hybrid diarchy is often fragmented, competitive, and dysfunctional.

There have been moments in which the Kremlin has looked more or less competent in recent years.  Tremendous economic performance and recovery from the global crisis.  Diplomatic advances with many new partners, such as impressive relationship developed with South Africa.  The dramatic conciliatory gestures made toward Poland at Katyn, and the sincere reaction following the president’s death in an airplane crash.  Successful management, at least in terms of the Kremlin’s goals, of relations with Washington.  It seemed that Moscow had come to grips with some of its limitations, realizing that its future lies in a diversification away from a one-dimensional energy economy. 

But then along comes the next public safety crisis – in this case the wildfires which have killed 50 people and wiped out hundreds of home in the Western regions – and the limits of this model of governance become appallingly clear.  The latest crisis revives the long-standing problem, as described by Financial Times as “Russia’s repeated inability to protect its citizens from disasters both natural and man-made.”