"Light bulbs of Anatolyich", agitation of Russians for physical education and Russian round dances - will the president finally decide on some more serious reforms instead of cosmetic innovations? Members of the "Stolypin Club" and " Business Russia”headed by Senator of the Federation Council Yevgeny Tarlo, they offered Medvedev one of the ways of real modernization of the country - to move the capital of Russia from Moscow.

The fact that Moscow has outlived its usefulness as the center of the country's administration, none of the participants of the round table doubted it. Evgeny Tarlo recalled that Russia changed the place of its capital many times: Staraya Ladoga under Rurik, then Kiev and Vladimir, under the Mongols - Tver and Moscow, St. Petersburg and again Moscow, a short time during the Second World War Kuibyshev (Samara).

A lively discussion was caused by the choice of a new capital city. Nikolai Ostarkov, executive director of Delovaya Rossiya, referred to the experience of Germany, where power is dispersed along the Berlin-Bonn axis. He proposes to build the same axis in Russia - Moscow - St. Petersburg. That is, some of the institutions of power should be left in the current capital, and some should be transferred to the banks of the Neva.

It is worth recalling that a number of state institutions are already located in St. Petersburg: the Constitutional Court, the Interparliamentary Assembly of the CIS, the EurAsEC.

Director of the Institute of Demography, Migration and regional development Yuri Krupnov is sure that the new capital should be founded in the Amur Region. The best option is about 50 km from the border with China. According to him, the Asia-Pacific region is becoming the economic and political center of the world, and the new capital of Russia will be able to integrate into this process. In addition, the capital on the Amur will symbolically show China that Russia does not intend to quietly cede these territories to a powerful neighbor.

Another plus in such a transfer of the capital to the Far East, Krupnov sees the inevitable “screening out” of the elite, who will not want to leave their homes in Moscow: “There will be a partial change of the elite by replacing aging personnel tied to conveniences, connected in clans and groupings - with personnel, focused on work and transformation”.

Former State Duma deputy from the Gaidar party, Grigory Tomchin, expressed confidence that the transfer of the capital would mean a change in the paradigm of governing the country. The current absolutism will be replaced by democratic methods of government. Tomchin also believes that the future of Russia is a territory of transit between China and Europe. Therefore, the capital of Russia should be an area somewhere in the center of Northern Eurasia.

Russia could earn tens of billions of dollars for the transport and handling of goods from China to Europe. Tomchin cited the following example as a terrifying one: the average speed of a container on Russian railways with Far East to the EU border is... 9.5 km/h. By increasing this average speed only up to 22 km/h, it becomes more profitable and faster to carry cargo from Southeast Asian countries to the EU railway through Russia than by sea through the Suez Canal.

The new capital of Russia somewhere in Western Siberia will more closely connect regions and people with each other. Tomchin referred to studies by sociologists, which showed that only 11% of Muscovites have been beyond the Urals at least once in their lives, 2% - in Karyakia and 20% - on the Volga. The nation becomes "immovable", and this is the first sign of the possible collapse of the state.

Tomchin dwelled on the thesis of the opponents of the transfer of the capital - the allegedly high cost of such an event. According to him, in order to avoid a transport collapse, Moscow needs to make 22 normal exits from the city, while now there are only 3 of them (St. Petersburg is doing even worse - 1 normal exit from the city with the required 16). Tens of billions of dollars will be required for road construction, but the construction of new outbound routes does not guarantee that in a few years they will also be stuck in traffic jams. So wouldn't it be better to "unload" Moscow in another way - the departure of millions of people, one way or another connected with the authorities, to another region?

State Duma deputy from United Russia, a native of Krasnoyarsk Viktor Zubarev also mentioned the desirability of creating a "powerful geographic axis" - but he proposed the Novosibirsk-Krasnoyarsk axis. Both cities are geographic center countries. In addition, Siberia is historically a freedom-loving region. There was no serfdom here, it was in Siberia that the most effective Russian workers settled - Old Believers and ethnic Germans. There is no and never was chauvinism and nationalism in the region - in contrast to Moscow, which was affected by these ailments. Zubarev considers Omsk another option for a new capital.

Anatoly Leirikh from Novosibirsk (that very effective German), chairman of the board of directors of the Himex Group and a shareholder of AvtoVAZ, reminded the audience that General Secretary Nikita Khrushchev planned to create the capital of the RSFSR in Novosibirsk. “But he did not have time, and since then we have been waiting for the restoration of historical justice,” added Leirich.

Boris Titov, chairman of Delovaya Rossiya, reassured the audience: “We now have a new way of thinking in Russia and a new government under which such ideas can be discussed.” Titov, who knows the world of domestic businessmen well, is sure that it will be difficult for business without closeness to power. “Any medium-sized business, not to mention a large one, is forced to have people who resolve issues in government offices. And if the capital is moved, then business will have to follow the authorities. And such moves will cost billions,” he laments.

But at the same time, Titov agreed with the idea of ​​moving the capital. His proposal is Tver. The city is located between the two main cities of the capital, with convenient transport links.

Then the floor was given to the author of these lines. I proposed to start with a symbolic act - to finally evict the supreme ruler from a medieval castle. Russia is the only country in the white world where the president still rules from the fortress-Kremlin.

My second idea is that the state should determine its development strategy. If it is, then the main state propagandist Vladislav Surkov will quickly justify the need for a new capital to appear in one place or another, and 90% of the country's population will agree with his arguments in six months of processing. If we set ourselves the task of becoming a great Asia-Pacific power, then why not move the capital even to Blagoveshchensk or Vladivostok. If we recognize that Russia has a “third way” and the status of the main state of Eurasia - as Alexander Dugin, who is close to power, propagandizes, then the capital may be in Krasnoyarsk or Novosibirsk.

If the monarchical idea is revived with the continuation of the manic aspiration last kings Romanov to the Straits (Istanbul) - then the capital can be moved to Rostov-on-Don. At the same time closer to the January isotherm of zero temperatures and the warm sea.

If Surkov and Medvedev announce Russia's return to the European democratic path of development, then the best option This is Novgorod. As one of the first democratic republics in the Middle Ages, along with Genoa and Florence. With the option of returning to their own democracy - the Constituent Assembly, once dispersed by the Bolsheviks, the capital can be transferred to Samara, as the seat of the last elected government of KomUCH.

In general, there are many options - and they all have the right to exist.

Professor high school economy, the head of the FBK company, Igor Nikolaev, recalled that the transfer of the capital of Kazakhstan from Alma-Ata to Astana cost only 2 billion dollars. So the transfer of the capital in Russia will not be too expensive either. At the same time, Nikolaev does not exclude the possibility that President Medvedev may well seize on such an idea. “He likes to perform symbolic acts, instead of everyday hard work,” added Nikolaev.

The last word was given by the moderator of the round table, Senator Yevgeny Tarlo. His idea is to create a “distributed capital” in Russia: various parts of state power should be transferred to several cities at once. Tarlo proposes to locate the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the embassies of foreign states, the Security Council, and the leadership of the Navy in St. Petersburg. The President must replace the medieval castle-Kremlin with the Konstantinovsky Palace.

The government must remain in Moscow. investigative committee and Gosnarkokontrol - to move to Tver, to build new pre-trial detention centers there. Legislative power - the State Duma and the Federation Council - should be transferred to the Urals, to Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk. The Fisheries Agency should be moved to Murmansk or Vladivostok. Academy of Agricultural Sciences - in Michurinsk or Stavropol.

In 2018, it will be 100 years since the government moved from Petrograd to Moscow. The round table participants agreed that at the end of his second presidential term, Dmitry Medvedev could make a gift to all Russians and found a new capital. In some way, the third president of Russia should, after all, be remembered by posterity.

Yuri Krupnov, Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Institute of Demography, Migration and Regional Development, proposed to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the Russian capital be moved from Moscow beyond the Ural Range. This initiative is included in the project "Doctrine of de-Moscowing", which the publicist recently sent to the head of state.

The public figure pointed out that modern Russia"hypercentralized" - the Moscow region alone absorbed almost a fifth of the entire population of Russia. At the same time, national development is focused on 15-25 megacities, in which more than half of all citizens of the country live.

According to the expert, as a result of ongoing internal migration, Russia may not only lose its geopolitical advantages, but also lose sovereignty over territories remote from large cities.

“Forcedly accumulating in narrow limited point zones, Russian people<...>they will not want to increase the number of their families, to move away from the global plague of small children and extinction.<...>Today, on 1/7 of the world's land, we live 7-10 times more crowded, crowded and taller than the same British and Germans, ”the draft doctrine says.

• Yuri Krupnov
• globallookpress.com
• Alexander Legky/Russian Look

A demographic specialist sees a possible solution to the problem in the transfer of the capital of Russia beyond the Urals. At the same time, Krupnov is convinced that priority in development should be given to Siberia and the Far East, and it is necessary to move from the economy concentrated in Moscow to the development of the country's territories.

The expert also suggests abandoning metropolitan urbanization in favor of low-rise landscape-estate urbanization, which will allow "Russians to re-explore their vast spaces, their own land and will contribute to avoiding forced small families and restoring demographic growth."

The public figure proposes that the state allocate to each large family its own "family estate" with an area of ​​at least 30 acres, which has all the necessary infrastructure.

According to Krupnov, in addition to the proposed measures, Russia should be “razmoskvich” by a project to build thousands of new cities and the accompanying new infrastructure. The expert proposes to provide transport communications for all small towns in the country with complete aviation and full restoration of navigability of rivers.

The head of the LDPR faction, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, in an interview with RT, expressed the opinion that there was no reason to transfer the capital of Russia beyond the Urals.

“No need to touch (to the capital - RT). The holy city of Moscow, which is already almost a thousand years old, and suddenly take - and the new capital. This is a lot of money, and most importantly - what is the point? We are leaving the Urals and will be the capital of an Asian state, that is, all symbols will be lost.<...>There are no economic, historical, legal, or moral and ethical grounds for transferring the capital,” he said.

• View of Yekaterinburg
• RIA News
• Konstantin Chalabov

The politician noted that the authorities should deal not with the transfer of the capital, but with the development of regions. He drew attention to the fact that the arrangement of the new capital will take too many resources.

“It just makes no sense to transfer the capital. Nobody interferes with directing money for the development of all other regions of the country. Otherwise, it will turn out that we will now equip another capital and tell everyone that now all the money goes to the new capital, so wait ten years, ”Zhirinovsky emphasized.

He also stated that his party would in no way support this initiative and would hinder it in every possible way.

In turn, Pavel Krasheninnikov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on State Building and Legislation, expressed confidence that the prerequisites for moving the capital Russian Federation do not exist and are unlikely to arise in the foreseeable future.

The deputy noted that any transfer of the capital is a "costly business" that "is hardly worth doing during a crisis." He recalled that in the history of Russia there have already been cases when the capital was transferred from Moscow to St. Petersburg and back, but then, according to him, there were prerequisites for this.

“Then it was a different story. Now I do not see any prerequisites, so I do not think that such a need is ripe. Yes, there is an overload in the capital, Muscovites suffer in many ways, but it seems to me that if this is torn off, then we will increase the suffering both for Muscovites and for those cities where, according to this project, it is planned to move the capital, ”TASS quotes Krasheninnikova.

• View of the center of Vladivostok from the cable-stayed bridge across the Golden Horn Bay
• RIA News
• Vitaly Ankov

The politician called the initiative “an interesting stuffing for discussion,” but doubted that it would be implemented in the coming decades.

First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Federal Structure and Local Self-Government Irina Guseva, in an interview with RT, called the proposal inappropriate.

“This is generally the wrong approach. What is the point of leaving the Urals, what will it give us? In my opinion, the most important thing in this matter is the need to reconsider, perhaps, interbudgetary relations, because the regions are very dependent on the federal center. We need to set a little more priorities in the regions, take care of the population so that people do not run away with small homeland, but were proud of it, developed enterprises, built businesses,” she said.

The Federation Council also does not believe in the prospects of such a proposal. First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Federal Structure, Regional Policy, Local Self-Government and Northern Affairs Stepan Kirichuk, in a conversation with RT, called the initiative far-fetched.

“No one needs Moscow either as a capital or as a metropolis if there is work and good living conditions. This is what governors, mayors, the population, residents, public organizations. Not the transfer of the capital, but the development of the regional economy, the creation of conditions for excellent work, the creation of jobs - this is the main thing, and not far-fetched events associated with such things, ”he said.

According to him, the capital can be located in any city, but the situation in the regions will not change from this: “What difference does it make for Buryatia, where the capital will be, if in 1990 they had 2 million rams and sheep grazing, and today - 200 thousand What difference does it make to them whether the capital will be in Moscow, Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk? It is necessary to solve the situation so that the rams grow and the meat is sold, and not the Mongolian is imported.”

• Novosibirsk
• RIA News
• Alexander Kryazhev

Judging by the results, in which more than 5,000 people have already taken part, RT readers support Krupnov's proposal. More than 50% of respondents voted for this option.

It is difficult to count how many times deputies, oligarchs, scientists, cultural figures or ordinary citizens proposed to take Moscow's capital status away. IN last years dominance among cities - along with overcrowding, traffic jams and other problems - many newsmakers aloud dreamed of dragging to the east. The most recent statement was made on his Facebook page by a member of the Supreme Council of the United Russia party, director of the Agency for Political and Economic Communications Dmitry Orlov - he proposed moving the capital to Yekaterinburg, which he considers "the best option."

And now Orlov's statement is being seriously discussed in the media, politicians and experts are arguing about this. With a feeling of undisguised envy, the editors of NGS.NOVOSTI decided to remind you that apart from Yekaterinburg, there are others that are more suitable for moving the capital of the city. For example, Novosibirsk. Judge for yourself.

1. Capital ambitions have haunted us since the beginning of the 20th century

About the status of the capital Russian Empire Novonikolaevsk did not have time to think, but it was able to declare itself the capital of the region already in 1907. The corresponding document, an act on the transfer of the then Altai District lands to Novonikolaevsk, was signed by imperial officials on December 9 in a building on Obskaya Street, 4 - from that moment Novonikolaevsk became an independent city, and later the capital of the region.

2. Novosibirsk has already tried on the capital's gloss

Novosibirsk felt like a capital for the first time in 1942, when during the war not only factories from the European part of Russia were transferred to the city, but also theater groups, the exposition and storerooms of the Tretyakov Gallery.

3. The vice-president of the Russian Federation spoke for the Novosibirsk capital

The ideologist of the transfer of part of the capital's powers to Novosibirsk in 1991 was the vice-president of the Russian Federation Alexander Rutskoi. In 2012, he told an NGS.NOVOSTI correspondent that back in 1991 he proposed moving the government to Novosibirsk, leaving the presidential administration in Moscow: “The government of the Russian Federation should sit in Novosibirsk. If we look into the perspective of our country's development, this should have been done 20 years ago. Investments would go not to China, but to Russia.” According to Rutskoy, all the Novosibirsk people he met during his perestroika trips rejoiced and "applauded standing" when they heard the idea of ​​moving the capital to Novosibirsk. But the plans were thwarted by Gennady Burbulis and Yegor Gaidar, who opposed this idea in Moscow.

4. The oligarchs dreamed of moving the capital to Siberia

The head of RUSAL, oligarch Oleg Deripaska, has repeatedly spoken out in favor of moving the capital from Moscow, for example, to Novosibirsk. He spoke about this in 2008 and 2009. “In order to fight corruption, it is necessary to move the capital to Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk. Peter I was forced to flee Moscow because bureaucratic expenses were a burden for development even in his era,” he said in an interview with the Spanish newspaper El Pais.

5. Novosibirsk was supported by neighbors from the Far East

In 2010, the information agency of the Far East "Vostok-Media" conducted a survey on the topic "Where should the capital of the state be located?", In which 2079 residents of the region took part. Novosibirsk was supported by 34% of them, in second place was Moscow (21%), in third - St. Petersburg (10%). Chief Editor RIA "Vostok-Media" Nikolai Kutenkikh then supported the choice of readers: "Such a choice only confirms that sane people live in the Far East." However, at the same time, he admitted that the inhabitants of the Far East did not have much love for the Novosibirsk people, and it was simply the geographical criteria and location of the city that were to blame.

6. The intellectuals wanted to see a scientific center as the capital

Novosibirsk won in the rating of alternative capitals in 2012, it got every fourth vote taken into account in the poll conducted on the RBC.Rating portal. The rating consisted of 15 alternative capitals, Novosibirsk got 24.03% of the vote, while it significantly broke away from its competitors: Yekaterinburg was in second place (17.5% of the vote), Vladivostok was in third (about 10%). At the same time, St. Petersburg was even lower with 9.09% of the vote. Roman Mogilevsky, scientific director of the Agency for Social Information St. Petersburg, suggested then that it was not at all in Novosibirsk. “Here there is a factor of a special critically thinking audience of the RBC portal. These are educated people who have become hostages of their own image of Novosibirsk. Your city in the conventional view is a major scientific, Education Centre with a highly developed innovative industry, a quiet political haven, a spacious, developed, tolerant city. Given that there are businessmen in the RBC audience, when answering a question, they took into account that the risk of losing business in Novosibirsk is lower than in Moscow or St. Petersburg, ”said the sociologist.

7. The idea was also supported by influential Siberians

Talk about the transfer of the capital from Moscow to Siberia began again after the statement by Sergei Shoigu that the capital of Russia should be located in Siberia. His remark was gladly supported by Vladimir Gorodetsky, who then served as the mayor of Novosibirsk. “I think when great politicians consider where the capital should be, Novosibirsk has the right to claim this mission,” he said. Gorodetsky also became the author of a local meme about the "capital gloss", which was supposed to appear in Novosibirsk after the next snow removal.

8. Deputies from the LDPR tried to make Novosibirsk a city of federal significance

The corresponding draft federal constitutional law was submitted to the State Duma by LDPR deputy Dmitry Savelyev. He proposed to form within the Russian Federation new subject- the city of federal significance Novosibirsk, and to place in it two ministries - the Ministry of Regional Development and the Ministry for the Development of the Far East. “Now everything is pulled together in one capital - Moscow. Outside the Moscow Ring Road, by and large, life seems to be non-existent. So, at least, the inhabitants of the province bitterly joke. As a result, Russia was placed in a province, in the so-called castle, ”Dmitry Savelyev explained his initiative.

9. In 2015, a convicted State Duma deputy spoke out in favor of the Siberian capital, straight from the colony

The corresponding bill, State Duma deputy from the Communist Party Konstantin Shirshov, sentenced to 5 years for trying to sell the mandate, wrote in the Matrosskaya Tishina colony, Gazeta.ru reported. He was not deprived of deputy status, so he could make any proposals. He called the bill "a testament from Matrossky", the deputy proposed moving the capital to Novosibirsk in order to "create a more stable structure of the territorial and political system with a center in Western Siberia." It was necessary to move the capital because of high housing prices, problems with infrastructure, corruption, social mobility and justice, he wrote. In total, there were 17 pages of arguments in favor of Novosibirsk. Among them was the frequently mentioned statement that "today Novosibirsk is the fastest growing city in the world, included in this regard in the Guinness Book of Records."

10. In the end, Novosibirsk was supported by Buryatia

Last winter, Arnold Tulokhonov, a member of the Federation Council from Buryatia, spoke out in favor of moving the capital, saying that Moscow was becoming obsolete, as reported by the Baikal Daily portal. When asked by a journalist about where to move the capital of Russia, the senator replied that there was no difference. Novosibirsk, Sverdlovsk. Doesn't matter. It could be any city. This cannot be done in Moscow. Moscow is becoming obsolete,” Tulokhonov was quoted by Baikal Daily. He also stated that the capital should be located in a more convenient location. “It is necessary to “take out” the capital from Moscow: it should be in the middle, so that it is convenient not for officials, but for the population. Today, 75% of all transportation is carried out through Moscow. And in order to get from Yakutsk to Chita, you have to go through Moscow,” Tulokhonov was quoted by InformPolis Online.

In Russia, they seriously argued about depriving Moscow of the official status of the main city of the Federation

The news suddenly burst into the information space that the capital of Russia could be moved from Moscow to another city. Under this initiative, the Doctrine of De-Moscovitization has been developed, which has already been sent to Vladimir Putin. Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin sarcastically called the idea of ​​moving the capital "brilliant", while other officials noted that such changes would require significant financial injections. About what can become an alternative to moving the capital and why Kazan is not the main city of Russia - in the material of Realnoe Vremya.

Will the transfer affect the health of the nation?

Yuri Krupnov, Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Institute of Demography, Migration and Regional Development, sent the draft "Doctrine of De-Moscovitization" to Russian President Vladimir Putin, in which he proposed moving the country's capital beyond the Urals, reports. Krupnov argued the transfer by the need to move away from the economy concentrated in Moscow and direct more resources to the development of the entire country, and especially the Far East and Siberia. In addition, according to Yuri Krupnov, the Moscow region "has absorbed almost a fifth of the entire Russian population", and national development takes place only in 15-25 Russian megacities, where more than half of the country's population lives.

In his doctrine, Krupnov speaks of the need to abandon metropolitan urbanization in favor of low-rise landscape-estate urbanization, which will allow "Russians to re-explore their vast spaces, their own land and will contribute to avoiding forced small families and restoring demographic growth."

Forced to accumulate in narrow, limited, pinpoint zones, Russian people will continue to lose the momentum of life creativity, - says Krupnov, believing that such a situation could lead to Russia losing its geopolitical advantages, as well as sovereignty over territories remote from large cities.

The project of transferring the capital from Moscow beyond the Urals was transferred to the Ministry economic development Russia, reports Lenta.ru.

Krupnov argues the postponement by the need to move away from the economy, concentrated in Moscow, and direct more resources to the development of the entire country, and especially the Far East and Siberia. Photo gosrf.ru

"Battle" will not be

The reaction of Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin was not slow in coming. “Moving the capital to the Far East is a “brilliant” idea. To spend a trillion or two to exile officials to 8 thousand km from 110 million Russians living in the European part. Even before, officials were exiled to Siberia and the East, but in a less expensive way, ”the head of the city answered Krupnov on his page in "VC".

In turn, the initiator of the idea of ​​moving the capital, Yuri Krupnov, called Sobyanin to a debate, leaving a comment on the post of mayor. Sobyanin on it answered another publication: “With all due respect to Yuri Vasilyevich, debating about fake ideas is a waste of time. You might as well debate the question "is there life on Mars?"

Capital - in Yekaterinburg

Other politicians were not left out. Thus, Irina Guseva, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on the Federal Structure and Issues of Local Self-Government, said that the transfer of the capital from Moscow does not make sense. According to the deputy, it is more important to review "interbudgetary relations" and develop the advantages of each region, reports Lenta.ru.

Another deputy, Mikhail Yemelyanov, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on State Construction and Legislation, noted that from a theoretical point of view, the initiative is interesting and worthy of substantive consideration. “But from a practical point of view, it is almost impossible to move the capital now due to the fact that certain costs are needed,” RIA Novosti quotes the official.

“Debating about fake ideas is a waste of time,” says Sergei Sobyanin. Photo na-zapade-mos.ru

One of those who not only supported the transfer initiative, but also proposed their own version of the capital, is Dmitry Orlov, a member of the Supreme Council of the United Russia party.

“Ekaterinburg could become the most adequate solution, and part of the capital’s functions could be delegated to several cities,” Orlov published in his blog.

There is, if not a tradition, then at least a steady trend: every few hundred years, our state changes its capital. Will it continue and which cities can claim the title of the center of the country?

Trade routes change capitals

The change of the main city, as a rule, took place against the backdrop of serious geopolitical changes. So, Veliky Novgorod can be considered the first capital of the Russian state - it was there that the Slavic tribes, according to legend, called Rurik to rule in 862. However, the center Ancient Rus' the city did not remain long.

Already in 882, Rurik's successor Prince Oleg settled in Kyiv. The "Mother of Russian Cities" suited the role of the capital in the best possible way: it was closer to Byzantium - the main partner of Rus', protected due to its convenient location on the banks of the Dnieper. In addition, the “Road from the Varangians to the Greeks” lay across this river - then the main trade corridor from North to South.

By the middle of the 11th century, after Kyiv became the residence of the Russian metropolitan, the institution of the capital in its modern sense was formed in the city. An important role in this was played by a long period of autocracy of the Kyiv princes. But with the offensive in Rus' feudal fragmentation and especially after falling under Tatar-Mongol yoke statehood formation stalled.

Rus', which was under the rule of the Horde, was, in fact, not a monolithic state, but rather a collection of separate principalities. At this time, Vladimir began to be considered the nominal capital - it was the local princes who were recognized by the Tatar-Mongols as the oldest. However, the local table, as a rule, was transferred to one of the specific princes of the North-East, and the "Varangians", having received the title " Grand Duke of all Rus'”, did not consider it necessary to personally meet in the city. As a result, Vladimir gradually turned into a provincial town.

After that, Moscow gradually came to the fore. Over time, local princes managed to unite Rus', liberate the country from the Tatar-Mongols and make their own hometown the capital of the newly formed state. It is believed that Moscow acquired the status of the center in 1389, when Vasily I came to reign.

The new capital, first of all, was distinguished by its favorable location - not only geographical and military, but also commercial. Through the Moscow River it was possible to get to other major rivers- Volga, Oka and Klyazma, and along them - further south. In addition, the city by the XIV century became the cultural and spiritual center of Rus'.

Moscow remained the center of the country for more than 300 years - until 1712, when, by the will of Peter I, St. Petersburg became the main city of the state. Petersburg, by the will of the sovereign, was specially created in order to be the capital. And the decisive factors in choosing a place were the proximity to Europe and the location on the sea coast: this allowed guests from other countries "to sail to the king by sea, and not overcome the dangerous road to Moscow." The swampy delta of the Neva was not the most successful place for building a city, but almost the only one that made it possible to connect Russia and Europe by the shortest sea route. This connection, according to the first emperor, was more in line with the development path that he saw for the Russian state.

The wind of change

However, as history shows, the choice of the capital directly depends on the ideas of the leadership about the future of the country. Petersburg was the main city for only two centuries: in 1918, the Bolsheviks who came to power, apparently no longer in need of guests “sailing by sea”, returned the central status to Moscow, which it still retains.

However, today voices are heard again, suggesting, if not completely, then at least partially, to transfer management functions to another city. Most often among the successors, of course, St. Petersburg is mentioned - he has been asked for this role since 1991. It is quite simple to explain this: on the threshold of the third millennium, pro-Western sentiments were strong in Russia, whose supporters believed that moving the capital closer to the “partners” would have a positive effect on the development of the state. Over time, other arguments have been added to this argument. For example, about high degree the workload of Moscow with all kinds of officials. And if the attraction to the West has gradually decreased, then the last contradiction remains unresolved until now.

However, in the future, St. Petersburg is far from the only city that could compete with Moscow for the right to have the title of the capital. So, one of the most dynamically growing settlements in Russia is Krasnodar. Its population for ten years - from 2006 to 2016 - increased by 20% - up to 853 thousand people. Total number of residents, of course, is not comparable with 12 million in the capital, but the increase turned out to be more significant than Moscow's 13%.

In addition, Krasnodar is consistently ranked among the largest economic centers of Russia. IN industrial complex cities - about 130 large and medium-sized enterprises, which employ about 30% of all employees. Moreover, the minimum number of unemployed was recorded in this settlement.

The local economy is highly diversified: there are factories that produce appliances, metalworking, and there are clothing and furniture factories. The favorable business climate that has developed in Krasnodar attracts the attention of both domestic and foreign investors. Officials, for sure, would be attracted by the opportunity to work in an actively developing city with a mild climate, just 100 kilometers from the Black Sea. And at the same time reliably guarded by the Russian fleet.

Another frequenter of various ratings Russian cities- Tyumen. This locality just like Krasnodar, it is one of the fastest growing regions: in ten years its population has increased by a third - from 542 to 721 thousand. In addition, Tyumen is the leader in the ranking of cities in terms of living standards in 2017, which was compiled by the Department of Sociology of the Financial University under the Government. According to citizens, the level of education, public services and road construction are recognized as the best here. The results show that Tyumen - the capital of the region's raw materials - has skillfully used the money received from oil and gas. And, of course, such an experience would be useful for the whole country as a whole.

At the right time in the right place

However, getting into the ratings is far from the factor by which the capitals of states are chosen. The determining factors here are historical role, And geographical position. For the main city of the country, it is important that its place on the map is convenient not only for communication between regions, but also for interaction with major foreign partners. Not for nothing, Kyiv, Moscow and St. Petersburg in different time took their place.

But times are changing. Russia, once openly pro-European, is now pivoting to the East and betting on the Northern Sea Route, hoping to become a conduit between the Old World and Asia. And the ongoing changes in the future may well encourage the authorities to change the capital.

As well as possible in this case, one of the two Far Eastern cities is suitable - Vladivostok or Khabarovsk. Already now, both settlements are competently using their border position, establishing relationships with the "Asian tigers". And Vladivostok made an infrastructural breakthrough thanks to the recently held APEC summit here. By the way, the event showed that the city is quite able to cope with representative functions.

Another contender for the title of the center, no doubt, is Krasnoyarsk. The city has already become the informal capital of Eastern Siberia, largely due to its powerful industrial base, transport and logistics capabilities. This settlement is located almost in the heart of the country on one of its largest rivers - the Yenisei, which connects Krasnoyarsk with the northern territories. The city itself is located very close to the southern border of Russia.

If, however, forecasts are made that the Northern Sea Route will become one of the world's main trade arteries, ready to compete with the Suez Canal in terms of the volume of transported goods, then Murmansk, one of the largest ports in Russia, will inevitably claim the title of capital. And the fact that this city is the largest in the world beyond the Arctic Circle should not scare off officials at all. The climate here is temperate, and given the widespread warming, the weather conditions can be considered acceptable at all. So the cold is unlikely to become a hindrance, which cannot be said about the polar nights.

Delegate in parts

Russia, by moving the Constitutional Court from Moscow to St. Petersburg, took a step in a similar direction. For our country, with its vast territory, the distribution of authorities could be a response to many challenges. It is clear why, until recently, for example, the ministries for the Far East or North Caucasus located in Moscow: to be closer to the decision-making center. However, in the age of new technologies, this need is gradually disappearing.

So in the near future, perhaps, management structures will be dispersed throughout the state: the ministry responsible for the NSR, in Murmansk; department in charge of relations with Asian countries - in Vladivostok. And officials will probably be in charge of oil production from Tyumen.