A brief rebellion in Russia sheds light on Putin's grip on power.

By

 The short-lived armed standoff on the road to Moscow marked the most significant power struggle in Russia in decades, despite its brevity.

A brief rebellion in Russia sheds light on Putin's grip on power.
President Vladimir V. Putin addressed Russia on Saturday amid an attempted mutiny that American officials saw as evidence of his eroding position.Credit...Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA, via Shutterstock

Behind closed doors, American officials have been contemplating whether Russia's failed invasion of Ukraine could eventually lead to President Vladimir V. Putin's downfall. However, despite the temporary resolution of the immediate threat posed by Yevgeny Prigozhin's rebellious mercenary army, the short-lived uprising has indicated that Putin's grip on power is currently more precarious than at any other point during his more than two-decade-long tenure.

The aftermath of the mutiny presents both opportunities and risks for President Biden and American policymakers, who find themselves in a highly volatile moment reminiscent of the early days of the Ukrainian invasion. The internal turmoil in Russia could potentially disrupt their military efforts in Ukraine just as Ukrainian forces are mounting a counteroffensive. However, there remains concern in Washington about the unpredictability of Putin, who possesses nuclear capabilities and might perceive a sense of vulnerability.

The United States views the situation as advantageous, as the distraction within Russia could weaken their military campaign in Ukraine and reduce the likelihood of Russia instigating further conflicts in places like Syria. Ensuring that control over all nuclear facilities remains in the hands of professional military personnel is of paramount concern to American officials. Evelyn N. Farkas, the executive director of the McCain Institute for International Leadership and a former Pentagon official, highlighted the importance of this objective.
The recent armed standoff on the road to Moscow, despite its brevity, marked the most significant power struggle in Russia since the failed hard-liner coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991 and the 1993 showdown between Boris Yeltsin and parliament. Unlike those events, however, the United States did not have a preferred side in this struggle, as neither Yevgeny Prigozhin nor Vladimir Putin were viewed favorably by Washington.

In response to the crisis, President Biden adopted a cautious approach and refrained from making public statements, recognizing the risk of providing Putin with ammunition to claim foreign interference. Instead, Biden convened a secure video briefing with top advisers at the White House's makeshift Situation Room while it is undergoing renovations. He also engaged in discussions with the leaders of key European nations. Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, adjusted his plans and held a video meeting to discuss Ukraine, while General Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, canceled a visit to Israel and Jordan.

Although the administration had contingency plans in place for such scenarios, they, like others, struggled to gather accurate information from Russia and interpret its significance. Social media and online sources became important avenues for insight alongside traditional intelligence assets.

Special attention was given to Russia's nuclear arsenal due to concerns over stability in a country capable of causing widespread devastation. However, senior officials reported no changes in Russia's weapon deployment or alterations to America's nuclear posture.

According to James Goldgeier, a professor of international relations at American University and an expert on Russia, the United States is facing two major concerns amidst the rapidly evolving situation: ensuring command and control over Russia's nuclear weapons and assessing the impact on Ukraine's efforts to reclaim additional territory.

Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a former Russia intelligence analyst and current member of the Center for a New American Security, suggests that the United States has limited ability to directly shape events in Russia. Therefore, the focus should be on preventing the escalation of violence and disorder beyond Russia's borders.

Andrea Kendall-Taylor emphasizes the need for Washington to avoid exacerbating the existing paranoia within Russia, which revolves around the belief that the United States or NATO could exploit the internal chaos. By refraining from actions that could reinforce this paranoia, it becomes possible to prevent an overreaction in Moscow and establish the foundation for potential future stabilization of relations with a different Russian leadership.

From the perspective of American officials, the recent events in Russia serve as evidence of Vladimir Putin's diminishing authority. Over the past months, they have been closely monitoring the intensifying conflict between Yevgeny Prigozhin and the leadership of the Defense Ministry regarding the management of the war in Ukraine. This has led to speculation about why Putin tolerated such public dissent and whether he may have secretly encouraged it for his own political motives.

By Saturday, it became increasingly clear to the White House and national security agencies that Yevgeny Prigozhin had inflicted significant harm to Vladimir Putin's standing. Prigozhin, who was once a prominent ally of the Russian president and played a role in orchestrating interference in the 2016 United States election, publicly discredited Putin's entire justification for the war. He refuted the notion that the invasion was a legitimate response to perceived threats posed by Ukraine and NATO. This public contradiction undermined Putin's narrative and further weakened his position.

As the crisis unfolded on Saturday, Vladimir Putin's speech to the nation comparing the situation to the collapse of the last czarist government in 1917 further contributed to the perception of a leader losing control. The fact that Putin ultimately struck a deal with Yevgeny Prigozhin after threatening to crush him only hours earlier reinforced the diminishing extent of his exclusive control over the use of force within Russia. This series of events has significantly weakened Putin's image and portrayed him as a vulnerable leader.

Alina Polyakova, the president of the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington, highlighted Putin's apparent weakness while also cautioning against the potential hazards that could arise from the collapse of his government. She suggested that the United States and its allies should focus on supporting Ukraine while preparing for various scenarios, including the fall of the Putin regime and the rise of a more brutal and less restrained hard-right faction regarding the war in Ukraine.

Even if Putin manages to retain power, policymakers are concerned that he may become more unpredictable if he perceives himself to be cornered. Jon Huntsman Jr., a former ambassador to Russia under President Donald J. Trump, stated that weakness on Putin's part could lead to riskier behavior. The perception of Putin's "invincibility" has been disrupted, providing opportunities for exploitation from various angles.

For Ukraine, the internal strife in Russia offered some relief as it pursued efforts, in collaboration with American arms suppliers and intelligence officials, to reclaim its territory from the invaders. The Russian crisis provided a welcome respite, particularly as Ukraine's counteroffensive initially faced slow progress.

The Wagner Group, led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, was considered the most effective Russian force on the battlefield. However, with Prigozhin seemingly heading into exile in Belarus and his troops being assimilated by the Russian Defense Ministry, the group's status as a ferocious fighting unit may be compromised.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, the Prigozhin rebellion ended before significant Russian forces were withdrawn from the front lines to protect Moscow, based on American intelligence. Nonetheless, U.S. officials anticipate that the internal discord will exacerbate existing doubts among Russian troops regarding the purpose of the war and the competence of their leadership. Furthermore, few believe that Prigozhin, who had a diverse background before his involvement in the conflict, will simply fade away. American officials expect him to continue playing a role and leveraging his influence.

Kurt D. Volker, a former ambassador to NATO and special envoy for Ukraine, views the Prigozhin revolt as a sign of the beginning of the end of both the war and Putin's tenure, even with the deal that halted the march on Moscow. Volker cautions against trusting the reversal, suggesting that it is a strategic move by Prigozhin to position himself as a hero to the Russian people while garnering more support and making demands. He predicts that the state will eventually pursue Prigozhin, giving him a justification for "reluctantly" defending himself.

Volker's perspective implies that there will be further developments and revelations in the unfolding situation, indicating that there is more to come.






#Russia-#Ukraine #War #James #Goldgeier  #Prigozhin #NATO  #VladimirVPutin's
#rebellion #Russia #Putin #Volker  #AndreaKendallTaylor #Moscow 





_____________________

If you have any questions or need further information, please don't hesitate to reach out to us at mustajabads@gmail.com
Thanks.

No comments:

Post a Comment