When asked about a possible third term, he reportedly insisted that the Russian constitution was sacrosanct and should not be altered just for his benefit. A great defender of the constitution, he portrayed himself as being.

Further, several observers noted, Putin's stepping down would show the outside world that Russia isn't some Central Asian "stan" where presidents have routinely altered constitutions in order stay in office indefinitely. Putin seemed to want to show that, in contrast to them, Russia is a civilized, constitution-governed state.

So what did Putin do instead? He waited almost until the candidacy filing deadline for the 2008 presidential elections to announce his support for his long-time close associate Dmitry Medvedev, who promptly declared his intention of appointing Putin as his prime minister. Genuinely enthusiastic about Putin, the Russian electorate did as it was told and voted for Medvedev.

Before leaving the presidency, though, Putin announced that he would become leader of United Russia – the party that most Duma members belong to (though Putin himself does not). And almost as soon as Medvedev was sworn in as president (in a ceremony that Putin appeared to dominate), he announced the appointment of Putin as prime minister - which the Duma gave its overwhelming support for the very next day.

Since then, it is clear that Putin has remained firmly in charge. The cabinet he heads as prime minister is almost the same as the one in office at the end of his presidency. Medvedev has reportedly appointed Putin loyalists to positions in the presidential administration. Medvedev's public statements indicate that he plans no major change from the previous course set by Putin.

So what was the point of Medvedev becoming president at all? Since Putin apparently intended to remain in charge all along, surely it would have been easier for him to have had the constitution changed and remain president. His transition from president to prime minister only created rumors and speculation that Putin would not be as strong as before which he obviously did not welcome since he has taken such pains to crush them.

His supposedly selfless adherence to the Russian constitution through leaving the presidency at the end of his second term has also clearly been negated by his transformation of the prime ministership into something far more powerful than the constitution intended.

Many observers have pointed out that Putin can run for president again after Medvedev serves (if that's what it can be called) for either one or two terms. And if Medvedev resigns from office like Yeltsin did before his term expires, under the Russian constitution the prime minister would become acting president – and could then be elected to another two full terms as president. Or perhaps Putin prefers being prime minister since, unlike the presidency, there are no term limits on this office.

Notwithstanding all this, however, is one decided disadvantage to being prime minister and not president in Russia: under the constitution, the president can dismiss the prime minister at will. Surely changing the constitution to allow Putin to run for a third term as president would have been far safer.

But Putin shows no signs of regret over this. For there is no risk that he will be dismissed by Medvedev. Indeed, Putin picked Medvedev to succeed him as president precisely because he knows that Medvedev not only would not, but could not dismiss him. Putin went to the trouble turning the presidency over to Medvedev not because he had to, but simply to show that he could do it and still remain in charge. And that is what he has done.

There is no need, then, to worry about the political future of Putin. It is undoubtedly quite safe for many years to come. The same, however, cannot be said for that of Russia - or perhaps we should now call it Russiastan.

--

Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University.