Russian Voters’ Choices Polarized by Split Center

TULA, Russia —  For the millions of Russians fearful of a second civil war between “reds” and “whites” after next month’s presidential election, tough-talking retired Gen. Alexander I. Lebed has a remedy: Vote for him.

For those equally turned off by the wild capitalism unleashed by incumbent President Boris N. Yeltsin and the embittered retreat planned by Communist challenger Gennady A. Zyuganov, the cerebral and articulate economist Grigory A. Yavlinsky points out an alternative: Vote for him.

And for those who believe there should be more middle ground between the filthy rich and the utterly impoverished, renowned eye surgeon and self-made millionaire Svyatoslav N. Fedorov says the solution for bridging the gap is simple: Vote for him.

That Russia’s rowdy and potentially destabilizing presidential campaign has come down to a two-man race and a choice between political extremes can be blamed on these three pretenders from a political center that won’t hold.

With less than a month to go before the June 16 election, a long-rumored and hoped-for alliance of democratic moderates to form a viable “third force” has become a casualty of ego, ambition and disregard for the wishes of Russia’s disillusioned voters.

“It’s not going to happen. How can three people cooperate in a contest for one presidency?” Lebed asked with little trace of disappointment as he groomed himself for a campaign appearance here, his home city, better known for its samovars than its politicians. No more than 200 supporters showed up.

*

While there may be only one presidency, many Russians were intrigued by the idea of a power-sharing troika that was the subject of speculation and negotiation for weeks.

Lebed’s drive to restore law and order and his vows to make the deflated Russian army great again made him a natural for the post of defense minister in the eyes of compatriots who have few other options in the quest for a national hero.

Yavlinsky has outlined a more detailed and sober economic policy than any other candidate, giving many Russians the impression that he would be well suited as prime minister in a reinvigorated effort to set the reform course straight.

And as a wealthy and successful innovator who has gained world acclaim for pioneering surgery techniques, the dapper Fedorov commands the kind of awe and respect voters across this troubled federation want to have for their president.

The failure of the Yavlinsky-Lebed-Fedorov alliance to take shape also defies political logic, because a centrist alternative to either of the front-runners could have captured much of the undecided vote--at least 40% of the electorate.

Opinion polls are notoriously unreliable in Russia--a fact that has been made evident by the seesawing predictions of the last few weeks that have alternately shown Yeltsin leading Zyuganov, running even with him and trailing badly.

But with 11 candidates now vying for the presidency, the electorate is seriously fractured, and neither Yeltsin nor Zyuganov can claim more than 20% solid support. The combined shares for Yavlinsky, Lebed and Fedorov often equal or exceed that.

With much of the population casting about for another choice, the third-force alliance could have become more than the sum of its parts and been a magnet for the disaffected.

The three long-shot rivals have yet to formally declare their quest for cooperation over.

But their separate talks with Yeltsin and his rumored offers of high-level posts in exchange for their dropping their candidacies have made clear that no viable campaign for the vast middle ground will be waged.

That has disappointed the many voters who oppose both Yeltsin and Zyuganov.

“Most people here think Lebed would make a good defense minister. But a president? Hardly,” said Georgy Kashirin, a 23-year-old student and part-time disc jockey at the Voice of Tula radio station, dismissing the retired general and legislator as a contender. “A lot of young people would support Yavlinsky, and Fedorov is popular with older voters because he made his money honestly. But as much as a third force was attractive to the voters, there was no way Lebed and Yavlinsky were going to get together.”

Such is also the consensus of political analysts.

“It would have been too much to expect that three such prominent figures could agree on putting only one of themselves forward,” said Vadim V. Bakatin, vice president of the International Fund for Economic and Social Reform.

The only candidate who stands to gain from the loss of a unifying alternative is Yeltsin: Fedorov and Yavlinsky are likely to encourage their supporters to shift their backing to the incumbent if he is the only alternative to the Communist Zyuganov in a second round of voting.

*

The June 16 first round will probably lead to a runoff. Unless a single contender wins with 50% or more, the top two finishers will compete in the second round, expected to be held three or four weeks later.

Yeltsin’s “reformist democrat” mantle has been reduced to tatters by his war against the rebel republic of Chechnya. And he is blamed for the hemorrhaging of valuable natural resources and money from Russia as government bureaucrats use their positions to benefit from inside deals on privatization.

But young and middle-aged Russians who have felt even a whisper of improvement in their lifestyles are loath to let the Communist Party rule again, even in the more moderate form of Zyuganov.

Without the moderates’ combined energies and constituencies to carry their troika into contention, ultranationalist firebrand Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky could now be the third-place finisher.

Yavlinsky’s star appears to be falling as a result of his fence-sitting over the third-force alliance and possible cooperation with Yeltsin.

On Friday, Yavlinsky floated a power-sharing plan that would give him an influential role in a Yeltsin government. The president’s reaction was cool, although on Saturday he offered Yavlinsky control over Russia’s market reforms in return for his support. Yavlinsky declined.

*

Once a top economics advisor to former Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev and now head of the Yabloko political party, the 44-year-old Yavlinsky has been concentrating his campaign in the reform bastions of Moscow and St. Petersburg--safe territory for a lofty liberal but unlikely to put him in closer touch with the uncertain masses.

Fedorov, a stout, bushy-haired 68-year-old, is also still campaigning despite hints that he will back Yeltsin before the decisive second round. After talks with the president in the Kremlin last week, Fedorov called for “an alliance of national unity” that would mend the huge rift running through the Russian people.

All three centrists acknowledge the risk of unrest and alienation if either Yeltsin or Zyuganov emerges to win the all-powerful presidency. But none is willing to settle for a lesser role in a coalition with a real chance to win.

“There is a tragic division in our society today, between the ‘reds’ and the ‘whites,’ ” Lebed has been telling the small crowds of supporters still coming to see him. “The only escape is to vote for the center. To avoid bloodshed, voters should support me.”

Fedorov blames Lebed for refusing to yield to what would have been the fundamental aim of a troika: to put forward a single candidacy.

Lebed accuses Yavlinsky of suffering a “split personality” as the economist has continued to waver between going it alone and pitching in with Yeltsin.

And Yavlinsky appears to hold the other two responsible for the nonstarter coalition because of their failure to accept him as an obvious choice for head of state.

The three men whose cooperation could have captured the vulnerable center ground now face the same fate as lesser challengers to Yeltsin and Zyuganov.

They are probably destined to be dismissed by voters as bickering and selfish, then soon forgotten as also-rans.