The US "withdrawal" from Iraq last year and the planned "withdrawal" from Afghanistan in 2014 cannot help but change the face of Central Asia and the Middle East. But how does Russia fit in, asks Eric Walberg

The world is living through a veritable slow-motion earthquake. If things go according to plan, the US obsession with Afghanistan and Iraq will soon be one of those ugly historical disfigurements that -- at least for most Americans -- will disappear into the memory hole.

Like Nixon and Vietnam, US President Barack Obama will be remembered as the president who "brought the troops home". But one cannot help but notice the careful calibration of these moves to fit the US domestic political machine -- the Iraqi move to show Americans that things on the international front are improving (just don't mention Guantanamo), the Afghan move put off conveniently till President Barack Obama's second term, when he doesn't need to worry about the fallout electorally if things unravel (which they surely will).

All the meticulous plotting to avoid Ukraine’s Orange Revolution resulted in -- Russia’s very own coloured one. But Russia is not Ukraine, discovers Eric Walberg

Russia’s electoral scene has been transformed in the past two months, without a doubt inspired by the political winds from the Middle East and the earlier colour revolutions in Russia’s “near abroad”. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s casual return to the presidential scene was greeted as an effrontery by an electorate who want to move on from Russia’s political strongman tradition, and to inject the electoral process with ballot-box accountability.

 Russia’s parliamentary elections have sparked a political crisis, surprising everyone, from President Putin (excuse me, Medvedev) down, including the demonstrators themselves, marvels Eric Walberg

Tahrir Square continues to send out its beacon of light. Thousands of Russian riot police were deployed in Red Square to prevent it from being turned into another Tahrir last Saturday, when demonstrators, without any resources except cell phones and fur-lined winter coats, pulled off the largest uprising since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, in 60 Russian cities, across nine time zones, with at least one repeat performance scheduled for 24 December.

The Duma elections held no surprises, but the election turmoil can’t obscure the kind of politics that will continue to characterise Russia over the coming decade thanks to United Russia and its eminence grise, predicts Eric Walberg

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev’s nomination of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as Russia’s pretender to the throne and Putin’s promise to keep his friend as premier was hardly a surprise. All along, except to a few starry-eyed liberals, it was clear, that the buck stopped not with Medvedev but Putin. The liberals were given their chance by Russia’s ex-KGB autocrat and failed spectacularly.

Medvedev’s claims to fame have been cosmetic or at best fiddling, starting with the faulty restart button with US President Barack Obama, proceeding through a series of giveaways, – allowing US troop and materiel to transit Russia to Afghanistan, leaving in place various US bases in Russia’s “near abroad”, acceding to the US-sponsored missile defence shield on its borders, and ending with Medvedev’s abstention on UN Resolution 1973 allowing the recolonisation of Libya.

All his talk about domestic reforms and a new European face for Russia proved to be hot air apart from privatisation, which merely handed yet more productive forces into the hands of the elite. His boyish face concealed a schoolboy naivete. The defining moment during Medvedev’s presidency was the Georgian invasion of Ossetia, and it was Putin’s steel fist that showed through as he took control of the situation.

Russians have continued to pack their bags for better pastures during the Medvedev years. Along came the Arab Spring and United Russia suddenly was exposed as a hollow shell, a party of “thieves and swindlers”. Putin risked losing his legacy, as the surge of pride and resolve to build a new Russia was frittered away by the Westernisers, and eclipsed by the dynamism of BRIC colleagues and now the Arabs.

But is a revival of the glory days of Putin’s presidency possible? The prospects for a new Putin presidency are being met with unease in Russian society. Protests on dozens of burning issues, from ecology to traffic, education to health, not to mention corruption, continue, as do terrorist bombings and assassinations.

It’s no wonder that many pine for the good ol’ days of state socialism. The Communists are regaining their respect, as the solutions to Russia’s pressing domestic problems and to its foreign challenges require a genuine spirit of unity. Putin hinted as much with his “United People’s Front” and his talk at the recent United Russia conference about progressive taxation and increased social spending, stealing a page from the Communists’ manual.

That Medvedev is a poor prospect even for PM was confirmed when Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said he would not work in a Cabinet led by Medvedev and was promptly fired by the president in a fit of peak. It is unlikely that Medvedev will last long in the grinding and thankless job of PM come March 2012.