Lost amid the clamor over the disastrous result of the Spanish elections on March 14th have been the results of the perhaps equally important Russian Presidential election of the same day. Frankly I suspect that, over the long term, these might be even more consequential. While it is far too early to proclaim the death of freedom in Russia, it would not be an exaggeration to say that, at the very least, liberal democracy has perished in that great land.

I still don’t know what to make of Vladimir Putin: is he a future tyrant that we shall have to confront? Or is he a strongman who will drag Russia into the modern era, a modernizer like Peter the Great? During the crisis of the late 1990’s, I took to referring to “Weimar Russia”. Frankly, as much as I’d like President Putin to be successful, I sometimes wonder if I was correct.

After all, when you think about it, the rise of Putin looks a great deal like the rise of Hitler. Russia did fairly well in the first years after the fall of the old regime, but then fell into economic chaos. Finally, the people democratically chose a strong leader to make order out of the chaos. While that election was broadly democratic, it was not without questions (the Apartment bombings in Russia prior to the last Presidential election, for example). Since then the nation has made a rather dramatic recovery and has begun to look towards a lost Empire.

I don’t believe this to be true. I very much don’t want it to be true. I view a strong Russia as a valuable ally in our coming conflict with China and hope that it would be useful against Europe. But I don’t think that it would be wise to altogether disregard the possibility of the worst-case scenario being true. We don’t know enough about the character of President Putin to rule out the possibility that, beneath the surface, he harbors some sort of mad ambition of rape and conquest.

The system of government that presently exists in Russia cannot be fairly called a dictatorship. While President Putin wields more power than a typical democratic leader, those powers he doesn’t have anything close to the control enjoyed by the old Soviet leaders. In fact, I suspect that he could be removed from office if he behaved in a way which did not truly enjoy the broad support of the Russian people. One of the great things about modern technology is the extent to which its spread has effectively undermined the capacity in any nation for a true totalitarianism. Those nations were old fashioned totalitarianism still exists mostly share a single common quality: isolation from the modern world.

What Russia has today is what I like to call an Authoritarian Democracy, one broadly similar in character to those that exist in some Asian nations, such as Singapore and Malaysia. The nation maintains something of a democratic character, but it is subordinated beneath a primary belief in the state and a leader who is accountable to only a certain degree. To put it another way, the present Putin regime could, for most practical purposes, be characterized as a Constitutional Monarchy. While Czar Vladimir holds less power than the terrible absolute rulers who presided over Russia in the past, he holds powers which can be seen as broadly comparable to those of the German Kaiser before the First World War.

While we must be wary of President Putin, that doesn’t preclude the possibility of our working with him. In fact, we’re likely to be a lot better off if we do. A strong Russia allied with the United States would be a vital pillar of any system of global security. While such a Russia would, of course, maintain its own interests, careful American diplomacy might successfully channel those interests.

A good positive first signal would be giving the Russians a free hand in Chechnya. Criticism of Russian actions there is silly and ineffectual. We aren’t actually going to do anything to stop human rights abuses there and, in any case, given the al-Qaedaization of that conflict, I see little reason why we not find better uses of our time.

Russia might also wish to march into Central Asia. This could be more problematic. Some nations in that region have been helpful to the United States and, for that, they must be rewarded. But, as for the rest, they can be left to their fate. If, that is, it would help bring Russia closer to the American position.

While the pro-US democracies in the Baltic region and other US allies in the former Warsaw Pact must be guarded, I see little reason why the United States would trouble itself about the fate of anti-American Belarus and the Ukraine.

Naturally, such deliberate neglect by the United States would have a price: full Russian assistance in the War on Terrorism. This would include, but not be limited to, diplomatic support, military assistance, and favorable deals on Oil to make up for any cut-off of supplies in the Middle East. Overall, I think that this would be hardly a bad deal for either side. Russia gets to get back some of the lost territory it desires most and the United States gets possible Russian assistance for action against our common Islamist foe. Perhaps even such a deal could be used to bring Russia’s nuclear arsenal more firmly under control.

We run a great risk in doing this. I understand that. But wars are not won by the timid. We must survey and facts and respond.