March 02, 2022
The Beginning of the End for Putin?
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine has been a clarifying moment. Since he came to power in 2000, various Western leaders have tried to cooperate, accommodate, or negotiate with him. But by embarking on a war of choice against a country he claims doesn’t have a right to exist, Putin has forced the international community to see him for what he is: a belligerent leader with a remarkable capacity for destruction. The result has been sweeping new measures designed to constrict and constrain him—punishing sanctions against Russia’s financial institutions, bans on Russian planes over EU airspace, and increased weapons shipments to Ukraine. Even Germany, long reluctant to confront Putin, agreed to exclude Russian banks from the SWIFT financial messaging system, reversed its long-standing prohibition on providing arms to conflict zones, and substantially increased its military spending. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has sparked nothing less than a sea change in international perceptions of Putin and what must be done to confront him.
Such a sea change could well be underway inside Russia, too. Throughout his tenure, Putin has maintained relatively high levels of public support thanks in large part to his ability to restore economic growth and stability after the turmoil of the 1990s. While most Russians have few illusions about their leader, recognizing the corruption that benefits him and the elite around him, it remained all but unfathomable to most Russians that Putin would launch a major conventional war against their Ukrainian neighbors. For months, many Russian analysts, commentators, and citizens alike were convinced that Putin would not engage in such an act of aggression.
The news of the war and the economic ramifications that followed have led Russians to see both Putin and Russia differently; Russia is not the same today as it was last week.
The prevailing wisdom holds that Putin will be able to survive any domestic backlash. That is most likely true. In personalist authoritarian regimes—where power is concentrated in the hands of an individual rather than shared by a party, military junta, or royal family—the leader is rarely driven from office by wars, even when they experience defeat. That’s both because other elites are not strong enough to hold the dictator to account and because domestic audiences have few opportunities to punish leaders for their actions. But the thing about repressive regimes like Putin’s Russia is that they often look stable right up to the point that they are not. Putin has taken a major risk in attacking Ukraine, and there is a chance—one that seems to be growing—that it could mark the beginning of his end.
Read the full article from Foreign Affairs.
More from CNAS
-
Transatlantic Security / Middle East Security
The Russia-Iran Partnership: A Geopolitical Balancing ActIt has been almost a year since Russia and Iran signed their comprehensive strategic partnership. That deal established a 20-year partnership between the two countries coverin...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor & Jim Townsend
-
Transatlantic Security / Technology & National Security
Look Before We Leap on Artificial IntelligenceThis article was originally published on The Dispatch. A debate about the role that artificial intelligence should and will play in society, and how it will affect humanity fo...
By Jon B. Wolfsthal
-
NATO Foreign Ministers to Meet in Brussels Without the U.S. In Attendance
NATO foreign ministers will meet in Brussels Wednesday, and the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Ukraine will be top of mind. But there will be a notable absence: The U....
By Jim Townsend
-
CNAS Insights | Ten Days That Shook the War
A bad peace is worse than no peace. ...
By Richard Fontaine
