Putin's re-election: Davankov's clear advantage in the vote of the Russian diaspora in Europe

A Soviet score, certainly, but not everywhere. The day after the Russian presidential election where Vladimir Putin was re-elected with 87% of the votes, the results, final or partial, show a strong contrast between the vote in Russia and that of the diaspora, in Europe and in the Caucasus. In Warsaw (Poland), Prague (Czech Republic) and The Hague (Netherlands), the official results give a clear majority to liberal opponent Vladislav Davankov. The latter, who nevertheless obtains only 3.86% of the votes at the national level in third position, scores respectively 51.01%, 59.89% and 56.88% of the votes in these three cities. Also in Yerevan (Armenia), his score is 49.85%, that of Vladimir Putin 32.87%.

In France, where the results have not yet been published, an exit poll organized in Paris by volunteers shows a similar result. According to this poll carried out in a non-academic manner, only 11% of Russians in France would have voted for Vladimir Putin, compared to 51% for Vladislav Davankov, and 28% would have voided their ballot as a sign of protest.

Among the three candidates who played the role of puppet adversaries to Vladimir Putin in the campaign, Vladislav Davankov, 40 years old and the youngest candidate in the election, embodied a rather liberal program. This former businessman became a deputy in 2021 under the colors of the “Novye liudi” (New People) party, then vice-president of the Duma, the lower house of the Russian Parliament. On the economic front, the party he leads defends more freedom for businesses, modernization of the economy and decentralization of the federal state. Vladislav Davankov, who also ran for mayor of Moscow in 2023, where he obtained 5.3% of the vote, also called for the rehabilitation of the social network Instagram in Russia, banned since 2022.

But he stood out above all for his least pro-war positions of all, even if his statements on this point are in reality ambiguous. At the start of the invasion of Ukraine, his party was the only one not to support recognition of the Donetsk and Lugansk republics - before changing its mind. On his site, the candidate indicated that he was in favor of “peace” through “negotiations” with Ukraine, but always on the basis of Moscow’s conditions. In his program, he called for a normalization of relations with the West and pleaded for an end to the "persecution of dissidents and ideological censorship", but his party voted in Parliament for all repressive laws in Russia.

Under these meager signs of a more liberal orientation, the candidate nevertheless very widely supports the policies of Vladimir Putin. What did he do to convince the diaspora? For Tatiana Kastoueva-Jean, director of the Russia and Eurasia center at Ifri, this vote is above all a second-best choice. “Alexeï Navalny before his death and the other members of the opposition in his wake called for a vote for any candidate other than Putin. However, Davankov is the youngest and least unsympathetic candidate, with his timid anti-war message,” explains the specialist.

The slight nuance displayed by the candidate in promoting the invasion of Ukraine was in no way pacifist, notes the researcher, but was intended to recover protest votes in favor of Boris Nadezhdine, the rejected opposition candidate. In fact, Vladislav Davankov was the only candidate to provide official support for the candidacy of this former MP openly opposed to the invasion of Ukraine, before his candidacy was invalidated by the Kremlin. This support was in no way a sign of political openness, but rather a fool's game to suck up the votes of the opposition, affirms Tatiana Kastoueva-Jean, who recalls that "Davankov is an integral part of the system, and his party the creation of the presidential administration.

For lack of an alternative, certain members of the opposition, such as the blogger Maxime Katz followed by many young people, had however called to vote specifically for this candidate. Its advantageous result is thus “clearly anti-Putin”, insists Tatiana Kastoueva-Jean. “If Nadezhdine had been able to participate, he would have won among the Russians in the diaspora,” assures the specialist.