A common viewpoint suggests that the current United Russia Party mirrors the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), implying a similar inability to foresee threats to its power or even to the Russian Federation. However, according to Aleksey Yaroshenko, this is a meaningful misunderstanding that results in flawed analytical conclusions.

In the latest edition of the russian Journal of Political Research, the Moscow political scientist asserts that it is fundamentally incorrect to perceive United Russia as an updated version of the CPSU, assuming it will be unable to anticipate and counter threats. He argues that this perspective is simply inaccurate (naukaru.ru/ru/nauka/article/98110/view and club-rf.ru/interview/548).

“Russia today,” Yaroshenko writes, “today is encountering unprecedented foreign and domestic challenges and this has given rise to numerous predictions about the further development of the situation and the country as a whole,” including speculation that United Russia and its country will go the same way the CPSU and the USSR did a generation ago.

Yaroshenko argues that these comparisons and predictions fail to consider the distinct institutional frameworks within which the CPSU and United Russia operate. During the Soviet era, the CPSU was constitutionally designated as the primary decision-maker and ideological guide for the nation.

Tho, today, “there is none of that.” Consequently, United Russia has been compelled to pay closer attention to public opinion and has developed a flexible approach to responding, enhanced by the absence of a mandatory ideology that once prevented the CPSU from recognizing the Soviet Union’s trajectory.

Unlike the CPSU, which “didn’t have to struggle for power, interact with people, compete or adapt” to the surrounding society, United Russia is obligated to do so. Consequently, it is not only “more adaptive” but also possesses “a greater reserve of firmness which makes it the dominating party under conditions of competition.” Yaroshenko suggests that this trend is highly likely to continue.

He highlights that Putin defined United Russia as “the system-forming party which is at the core of the system” and fulfills two basic functions – “the organization of the political infrastructure of the president” and “the consolidation of representatives of the elite around the President’s strategic course via cooptation.”

Therefore, it is evident that United Russia is not a contemporary iteration of the CPSU and will not respond to challenges in the same manner. “Nobody predicted the collapse of the CPSU,” Yaroshenko says; and the misperception of what was happening then is being continued by those who act as if United Russia is imply an updated CPSU.

Consequently, United Russia demonstrates a greater capacity to manage even the most significant challenges compared to the CPSU, the Moscow political scientist concludes.