Short of his falling out of an SUV speeding the wrong way down Moscow’s traffic-congested roads, there was never any doubt that Dmitry Medvedev would be elected Russia’s next president. The outgoing president, Vladimir Putin, who remains Russia’s most popular politician, picked Medvedev as his successor, and under the current system of media manipulation no challenger had a chance of beating the Kremlin’s choice.

But, as the west’s relations with Russia deteriorate, headlines about growls and sharp claws are bound to escalate. The uncertainty centres on what happens once the new man takes power in May. Will he want to carve out his own policies and, if so, how will they differ from Putin’s? There are two theories on each question. Theory one starts by arguing that Medvedev was selected by Putin under a deal in which the former president would publicly announce his intention to become prime minister and continue playing a major role after leaving the Kremlin. This means that Medvedev will be the country’s titular and ceremonial boss while power shifts to the government.

Proponents of this version point out that Medvedev differs from Putin in one important particular. He has no career link to the siloviki - the so-called power men of the security services, army and interior ministry - which means he is bound to be a weak figure, subject to blackmail, pressure and threats if he tries to undo the authoritarianism of the past few years. This cohabitation of weak president and strong prime minister would continue until 2012, when Putin can run for the presidency again.

Theory two claims the opposite. Its supporters note that Russia’s 1993 constitution gives the president the right to sack the prime minister- an article Putin has denied wishing to change. If this theory is correct, how will Medvedev change Russia’s course? Most analysts believe the answer is “Not at all”. Medvedev is unlikely to change Russia’s system of authoritarian democracy. He is a manager, not a visionary: a bureaucrat, not an intellectual; an executive, not an innovator. The critical mass of Russian society has always been conservative, forcing radical reformers into frustration and dissidence. The same is true today, sad though it is after the hopes and promise of the Gorbachev years. But Russia’s chattering class is still enjoying enough wealth and freedom to travel and consume so as not to be concerned about the regime’s clampdown on human rights, opposition parties and NGOs .

So continuity is the name of the game. You can call Sunday’s change “From Putin to Putin”. You can dub the new man “Putvedev”. Those who thought western-style liberal democracy had won the cold war did not get it right. The authoritarian modernisation by way of state-controlled or state-subsidised mega-corporations in an essentially one-party polity, which Japan, South Korea and Indonesia went through some decades ago is now under way in Russia - and, of course, China. - The Guardian