Two extraordinary events took place in Europe last week. In Moscow, some 50,000 people took to the streets to protest fraudulent parliamentary elections that nevertheless greatly reduced the ruling party's majority. The protest was the biggest anti-government demonstration since the fall of the Soviet Union. There were also protests in St. Petersburg and other Russian cities. More than one thousand people have been arrested.

The other major event was the British veto of an economic reform treaty, supported by 26 out of the 27 members of the European Union. Nobody ever thought the British would exercise their right to veto something agreed upon by the rest of Europe, but that's exactly what Prime Minister David Cameron did. Europe is not only aghast, but angry and deeply divided. In Britain, of course, many and perhaps most people are happy that Cameron stuck it to the Europeans. The European Union has never been exactly popular in the U.K., despite British membership for more than 35 years. The question is, does British isolation really matter? In the coming months, we will find out.

In Russia, communists, nationalists and Western-leaning liberals turned out despite divisions between them. The first hint of this extraordinary development was when Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was publicly booed at a recent martial arts demonstration. This was an unheard of act in Russia's "managed democracy," led by Putin since 2000. "Managed democracy" has much in common with Russia's historic leaning toward autocracy, and it has worked as long as incomes rose in the past 10 years and the Russian government doled out billions of dollars in social welfare benefits, all paid for by Russia's burgeoning oil exports.

In other words, the Russian people had a social contract with Putin and his government that meant a rising standard of living in exchange for political acquiescence. But those days have been over for the past two years, as Russia too succumbed to the dire effect of the recession that has hit both Europe and America. Moreover, United Russia, Putin's party that had acquired more than a two-thirds majority in the Duma, or parliament, in the previous election, is now seen as the party of "swindlers and crooks," and was publicly labeled as such by Russian protesters. United Russia lost some 77 seats last week, and it is unclear that the party can form a parliamentary majority. The communists came in second, with reform groups trailing behind.

Not that we are about to see a "Russian Spring." Putin still holds a public approval rating of about 60 percent, and he is particularly popular with women over 40. We must make of that what we will, but it is true that his bare-chested photos are popular among certain segments of the population. Putin is running for president again in elections to be held in March. It is clear that he will probably win, given how elections are managed in present-day Russia. And there is no clear threat to his remaining in power as prime minister. But there is international concern over the clear fraud in last week's elections, with cellphone photos as evidence of ballot-stuffing and other crimes. There is even a possibility that the elections could be overturned and held again. Now that would be interesting, for if that were to happen the whole system could be overturned.

Meanwhile, Europe is trying to digest what happened at the Brussels summit when the British vetoed an economic reform treaty approved by the other 26 members of the European Union. The British were determined to protect the city of London from current and future financial reforms London felt would fall unfairly on it, as London is arguably the world's biggest financial center, accounting for some 10 percent of the British economy and perhaps as many as a million British jobs. The Europeans, led by France and Germany, said "no," or "non," or "nein." In effect, the British were told "you're either in Europe and with us, or you're out." Many European commentators demanded the British get out of Europe, noting that as the British had never adopted the euro, but instead kept their own pound sterling, that Britain's heart was not really in creating an ever-more united Europe.

Few Britons would disagree with that view, but nevertheless Britain remains a key member of the European Union, one of the "big three," along with France and Germany. What Britain is interested in is a united market, not a united Europe. But can we have one without the other? The Europeans say there can't be one without the other. The British are holding out.

William M. Stewart, a former U.S. Foreign Service officer and Time magazine correspondent, lives in Santa Fe.