Analyse
Khodorkovsky’s assertion that Russia’s system under Putin replaced the rule of law with 'the rule of one man' aligns with widely documented trends, including selective prosecutions of oligarchs (e.g., his own case) and centralization of power. However, his denial of being a politician is misleading: prior to his 2003 arrest, he funded opposition parties (e.g., Yabloko, Union of Right Forces), lobbied for liberal reforms, and reportedly explored a presidential bid, actions that blur the line between business and politics. His statement reflects a partial truth—his business *became* overtly political due to systemic pressures, but he was already politically engaged. The Yukos case itself was widely viewed as politically motivated by analysts and courts (e.g., ECHR 2011 ruling).
Achtergrond
Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once Russia’s richest man, was arrested in 2003 and convicted on fraud/tax evasion charges, which critics (including the ECHR) deemed politically driven. His Yukos oil company was dismantled and assets transferred to state-owned Rosneft, a pattern repeated with other oligarchs who challenged Putin’s authority. The 2000s marked a shift in Russia toward state dominance over key economic sectors, often using legal pretexts to neutralize independent power centers.
Samenvatting verdict
Khodorkovsky’s claim about the politicization of business in Russia under Putin’s system is broadly accurate, though his self-description as 'never a politician' ignores his active political engagement before his arrest.