As Russia’s three day presidential election process unfolds, the inevitability of Vladimir Putin’s victory looms over the nation like a foregone conclusion. With Putin poised to secure his fifth term as president, the facade of democratic choice masks the entrenched authoritarianism that defines Russia’s political landscape. Since ascending to power in 2000, Putin has navigated Russia’s political terrain with Machiavellian finesse, consolidating control and extending his reign through strategic maneuvers and constitutional amendments.

The upcoming election serves as yet another orchestrated spectacle to affirm Putin’s grip on power rather than a genuine exercise in democracy. Putin’s trajectory to perpetual presidency has been paved with cunning political maneuvers, including his stint as prime minister from 2018 to 2021, which did little to dilute his authority. By manipulating constitutional amendments, Putin circumvented term limits and paved the way for an extended reign until 2036, a move reminiscent of autocratic predecessors like Joseph Stalin and Catherine the Great. Despite the pretense of democratic legitimacy, the election process in Russia is marred by coercion, manipulation, and the suppression of dissent. The Kremlin’s fixation on achieving specific voter turnout and support percentages underscores the regime’s desperate need for validation amid internal dissent and external scrutiny.

The Kremlin’s ambition for a high voter turnout is not merely a reflection of public engagement but a strategic imperative to legitimize Putin’s future decisions, particularly those tied to the ongoing conflict with Ukraine. The war’s toll on Russian soldiers and the economy has strained public sentiment, making the veneer of popular support more critical than ever for Putin’s agenda.

Amidst a landscape devoid of genuine opposition, the roster of presidential candidates serves as a mere formality rather than a meaningful choice for voters. With prominent critics like Alexei Navalny silenced or sidelined, the field is left populated by token challengers who offer no substantive threat to Putin’s authority. The absence of genuine opposition candidates is exacerbated by systemic repression and censorship, which stifles dissent and perpetuates a climate of fear. Russian citizens, wary of reprisal, navigate a precarious balance between silent skepticism and outward compliance, eroding the legitimacy of the electoral process.

The inclusion of occupied territories in Ukraine in the election further underscores the Kremlin’s disregard for international norms and territorial integrity. Reports of coercion and pressure on local populations to participate in the election highlight the regime’s willingness to manipulate the electoral process to suit its agenda. The introduction of online voting and extended polling days, ostensibly to accommodate pandemic restrictions, raises concerns about transparency and electoral integrity. Critics argue that these measures complicate oversight and expose vulnerabilities to manipulation, further eroding public trust in the electoral process.

As the election unfolds, calls for boycotts and international condemnation underscore the growing disillusionment with Putin’s regime both domestically and abroad. Yulia Navalny’s appeal for a boycott reflects a broader sentiment of defiance against a regime bent on maintaining its grip on power at any cost. In the aftermath of the election, Putin’s victory may be inevitable, but its legitimacy remains suspect. A low turnout would signal not only waning support for the regime but also a deepening of state control and repression, further entrenching Russia’s descent into authoritarianism.