Putinomics concludes that this strategy has ultimately worked, even if the country still struggles with corruption and low economic growth. Rely on private business to improve efficiency, but only where it does not contradict the previous two strategies.Īfter the traumatic ’90s, Russian leaders and most of the public determined that these priorities made sense in order to maintain stability.Prevent popular discontent by guaranteeing low unemployment and adequate pensions.Strengthen central authority, ensuring the Kremlin has the power and the money to enforce its writ.In order to understand Russia’s economic policies and what may happen next, Miller describes Putinomics’ three-pronged strategy that the Kremlin hopes will help the government maintain power, expand influence abroad, and develop the economy: By this standard, “Putinomics” has been unexpectedly successful.

Venezuela even had a better credit rating and a higher per-capita income when Putin came to power.

Putin’s Russia still has numerous challenges today, but Miller argues the federation should be compared to fellow petrostate Venezuela since both were similar in the late 1990s. Those technocrats, according to Putinomics, prevented the country from collapsing economically and allowed Moscow to exert influence globally. While affirming corruption is problematic, Miller strives to demonstrate how the country is much more complex as competent technocrats and corrupt oligarchs compete for influence. This book helps readers understand why Putin addressed pension policies and why citizens protested, and it also offers a slightly different perspective from writers who emphasize Russian kleptocracy. For many in the United States who only notice Russia when the old Cold War adversary meddles in elections or asserts itself in places like Ukraine or Syria, this commotion over domestic policy came as a surprise.įortunately for those who don’t follow these issues regularly, Chris Miller-an assistant professor of international history at Tufts University-provides a superb review of Russia’s economic policies in Putinomics: Power and Money in Resurgent Russia. In response to these pension changes, the president went from winning 77 percent of the vote in the March 2018 presidential election to having a 64 percent approval rating now. Last year Russians across the country protested against legislation that raised the retirement age from 55 to 60 for women and 60 to 65 for men, but President Vladimir Putin still signed the bill into law in October.

Putinomics by Chris Miller