Before the presidential elections in Russia there is hardly less than a year. In their outcome, few doubt, but against the background of the election campaign, the domestic political situation in the country is heating up - and it's not just about protests.

On the war of the Kremlin towers, the consequences of re-election of Vladimir Putin and the thoughts of the opposition about the fate of the Crimea, the "Observer" talked with former employee of the Presidential Administration of Russia, economist and politician Dmitry Nekrasov.

In the first part of the interview, read about the consequences of stagnation in the Russian Federation, real damage due to sanctions, technological backlog and gas pipeline projects bypassing Ukraine.

- Russia entered the period of internal turbulence, may not be critical, but still. Protests against Medvedev, Putin, against renovation ... All this can result in something more?.

- Russia was quite expected to enter the period of turbulence. We still have elections in 2018. Let's estimate Putin's lack of alternatives, say, 95%. Maybe there is another version of the successor, although I doubt. But an important aspect - each of his presidential term, Putin began as part of several new coalitions. The team always changed, key players, clans changed.

Here and now there is a fierce struggle between the Kremlin clans for a place in the new coalition. For example, the story of protests against Medvedev looks like part of this struggle. I am absolutely sure that Navalny's film was created by filing one of the clans, which merged the information.

- "Siloviks" mean?.

- I do not know for certain, but they say that Igor Sechin (the head of Rosneft-Red. I do not approve, however this is the most common version. But from the filing of Sechin or someone else, Navalny accurately received information from within.

The history of renovation is a campaign to defeat Sergei Sobyanin (mayor of Moscow - Red. People who were not seen in any opposition, who always carried out the orders of the pro-Kremlin organizations, actively joined the history with renovation. That is, once again one tower is struggling with another. Again I can not confirm, but there are rumors that Sobyanin is attacked by Vyacheslav Volodin (chairman of the State Duma - Red. ) Although, maybe, another clan. Closer to the election of such stories will be more. This does not mean that protest movements are puppets of the Kremlin clans. They just use each other - each for their own ends.

It is also evident that the "post-Crimean anesthesia" is being treated. In 2014-2015, the ratings of support for the authorities, not only personally Putin, but in general the actions of the authorities, grew insane. Now they are declining. They have not yet fallen to the level of early 2014, but already close. Without all this military hysteria, people are increasingly thinking about the economy. This trend leaves its mark. Whatever it was, by the end of this year, I think the coalition will be formed. Accordingly, just in the fall of 2017, strong turbulence can occur. This does not mean that the regime will change, but unexpected changes may occur. Most likely, this will happen, including taking into account street protests.

- Medvedev's resignation likely?.

- Very likely. I do not really believe that you can keep Medvedev in the current situation.

- What will Putin's re-election mean for Russia?.

- I treat all this very negatively, but what does it mean? By and large, all decisions were made in two time points: in 2011, during the reverse castling and in 2014 with the annexation of the Crimea. What is happening now is more the formulation of decisions taken. Accordingly, no matter how much anything will change due to his re-election. Something will change for his entourage, some posts will change and so on.. But the global course of the country will continue. This course is built on political confrontation with the West. In my opinion, it is this component of Putin's policy that is the most disastrous for the country.

- The course in the Ukrainian direction will also remain the same?.

- In general, yes. There may be some local adjustments. First, this course depends on the relationship with the US. Secondly, from what will happen inside Ukraine. But global changes are unlikely to occur. Before Putin's departure from the post of head of state in any way, the settlement of Russian-Ukrainian relations should not be expected. I just can not imagine it, maybe I have, of course, problems with the imagination. On trifles can agree, you can reduce tension, stop shooting, for example, you can also. But the general course on the destabilization of the situation in Ukraine will be continued.

- In relation to Ukraine, especially in the Crimean issue, many Russian oppositionists take an ornate position. For example, Ukrainians are outraged by Navalny's proposal to hold a repeated "referendum". There was also a strange statement by Khodorkovsky about a possible joint management - it's not at all clear how he imagines it. Why is that?.

- A politician should always say what his listeners like, otherwise he will not be a popular politician. Do not get it wrong if there are no critical changes in Russia (civil war or some absolutely terrible crisis), even the most pro-Western and liberal political force will not just give up the Crimea. To my deep regret, the majority of Russians want Crimea. From my point of view, this is at least strange, but okay. In any case, because of this, no politician in the foreseeable future will raise the question of the return of territories.

The seizure of the Crimea was a terrible mistake, many are ready to admit it. But now everyone is forced to interact with the objective moods in Russia. Therefore, the positions of Navalny and Khodorkovsky are in fact logical. They are going to fight for power. And the statements about the return of the Crimea to power in Russia do not come.

"It's not that they already had chances ..." "Yes, they do not have a lot of chances. But it is still difficult to imagine a Russian politician who hopes for some success and at the same time promises to return the Crimea.

From my point of view, the annexation of the Crimea was for Russia an extreme form of stupidity, first, because of the confrontation with the West. Secondly, because Russia is built in such a way that 4-5 regions at the expense of oil money contain all the rest. Crimea just became another such region on the content. Just the same amount of oil money began to be divided into more people. I do not understand the logic. I do not understand why people from the Eagle and Yaroslavl want Crimea because some of their oil money that they could get is now distributed there. Crimea is a pure economic liability. The seizure of Crimea does not bear any economic advantages at all. But the majority of the population of Russia, alas, thinks differently. And this reality needs to be taken into account.

As reported by the "Observer", there were new photos and videos from the protest in Moscow.

Join the "Observer" group on Facebook, stay tuned!.