Hundreds of Londoners attended a debate on Thursday, May 23, 2013 and rejected a motion that “Putin has been good for Russia.” The debate, staged by Intelligence Squared, was held at the Royal Geographical Society in Kensington. Asked for their views before the debate, 21 per cent of the audience agreed with the motion that Vladimir Putin has been good for Russia, with 40 per cent against and 6 per cent undecided. Following the debate, 37 per cent of the audience voted in favour of the motion, with 57 per cent against and 6 per cent undecided.

Speaking against the motion were the renowned Russian journalist, Masha Gessen, who was famously sacked as editor of a nature magazine for refusing to cover President Putin’s hang-glider flight with Siberian cranes, and Luke Harding, Senior international correspondent at the Guardian, and the first western journalist to be expelled from Moscow since the Cold War. Defending Putin were Christopher Granville and Boris Jordan. Jonathan Freedland, the Guardian columnist, author and broadcaster, chaired the debate.

Gessen spoke about the collapse of free media under Putin and explained that many of the economic successes attributed to him by his defenders were not down to him but the result of economic trends that he had nothing to do with. She emphasised Putin’s failure to reinvest oil revenues in Russia’s economy and society, highlighting the marked contrast between that failure and the approach adopted by Mikhail Khodorkovsky prior to his imprisonment in 2003.

Following the economic crisis of 1998, she argued, Khodorkovsky became the first businessman in Russia to realise that business had a responsibility. He began reinvesting, developing good corporate governance and making Yukos a ground breaking example of transparency and efficiency. She was, however, downbeat regarding his prospects for release, stating that she felt he would probably remain in prison as long as Putin is in power. Asked by Freedland for his perspective on Khodorkovsky’s imprisonment, Harding added that the reason he is in prison is not because of any alleged crime but “because he disrespected Putin.”

After rigorous debate, and questions from the floor focusing on Putin’s record on the economy, human rights and international affairs, the audience voted to reject the motion that Putin was good for Russia.