Current Affairs

There is not that much difference from totalitarianism than fascism. The autocratic state that Putin has created is just a mirage for its extreme arguments, but what Putin has done is provide his population with secure government after the chaos of the break up of the Soviet Union, but is this enough?

Prigozhin’s rebellion last week, ensured that the world understood that once Putin is cornered, he has very little say in the matter. Catherine Belton, in her book Putin’s People describes Putin’s ruthlessness as all persuasive. He is a power unto himself, but most of all he is a manipulator of people and events. Security issues were always a question of whether the state had a hand in the event, or it was an episode of extreme violence by elements of the state.

The cornered rat has been all encompassing this week, the sadist, street boy and KGB operative are all elements that have been mentioned. But the question always has been what would happen if Putin was cornered, what was going to happen to those who dared challenge the man. The answer is simple, the bite is a growl, the attack is banishment to kennels in Belarus, but most of all it is a realization that Putin fears the unknown.

Everyone on Twitter saw Prigozhin’s madness grow. His frustration with those at the top became explosive and his failure to temper the argument led to a kind of beer hall putsch, which consisted of free coffee and ice creams for his men. In many ways there are so many warnings in history that this is by far more serious than a march on the palace of power, it is a precursor of what is to come, when so much power is centred in the hands of one man. The failure of Wagner’s march to Moscow, was that it was possible to get within 130 miles of Russia’s power and with little damage to the men involved.

Many commentators and writers tell you that this is the end of Putin. But there is not much to go on, other than a march that got nowhere, didn’t make any difference, other than the disbandment of Wagner in Russia, questions of their status as a mercenary force in the Middle East and Africa and finally the exile of its leader. There are deeper questions that need to be asked and that is what is the glue that holds Russia together.

Are the military the core power now or is the FSB still capable of manipulating outcomes, not only in the Kremlin, but also greater Russia itself. The question of where power lies is now a question that is out in the open. The ceremonial guard, the red carpet and staircase all dictated a lineage of power that Putin wanted to project in his last speech. His trip to Dagestan, all lead to the question of what Putin wants to project, all carefully rehearsed projections of state power and political popularity. But Putin has done this before, brought his head above the parapet and told his people that he is not only all powerful, but also a man of the people.

Was there a question that the state has been hollowed out since the war in Ukraine and are the resources laid thin for the rest of Russia. If there was to be a Ukrainian victory, what would happen to the army, can the FSB shore up the nation or is there very little else that keeps Russia stable. This has all been realised by the West, there is very little between Putin and a serious push to remove him from power. How this is handled is very dependent on how you see Russia, but it has been weakened by the events that happened last week.     

Does this mean that the Liberals in Russia will gain a voice. The problem is that they are powerless as the resources of the state have been focussed on removing their voices into prisons. So the question is where will the power that removes Putin come from. It is not a question of where or when this will happen, but if there is somebody hungry enough to remove the voice that has got Russia into the mess that it is in. In other words- will there be a different sort of government.

Putin is concentrated on a type of Imperialism that signifies the power base that he holds onto, but identity of Russia and its future has always been questions among the elite after the invasion of Ukraine. The fault lies squarely with the small powerbase that is dominating Russian politics. The Duma does not exist, other than as a vanity project for Putin and his cohorts, it just provides a rubber stamp for the government. That is the problem with authoritarian government, it just does not have the space to see upcoming problems, however obvious Prigozhin made his position.

The imperialistic argument is that the centre of power itself is the Kremlin and if right, the  central powerbase has been transposed by his visit to Dagestan. Something happened in Moscow that made Putin fear walking on the streets of this city. He did not go to his home city, St Petersburg, but moved the conversation to the Caucuses, with a stage managed Western political photo opportunity, to be seen as the man of the people. Commentators have called it un-Putin-like, weird and very strange for a man determined by fear of contagious illness’.

The long table has gone for the time being, but there are hints of strained arguments of whether Putin has been to long coddled by fear of the unknown. Will these practices continue, especially after the farewell Prigozhin received when leaving for exile. Does Putin have to create more than one photo shoot of being a man of the people, that is what the question will be for the next year, especially as there are Presidential elections next year.

What comes after Putin is dependent on elements of the state moving in unison with a popular figure. Prigozhin’s beer hall attempt of a putsch has shaken the leadership of Russia, Putin is acting strangely, followers do not recognise this man trying to show an image of popularity. His isolation, has also been a signature of Imperial power, but the reality is that he has been undone by Prigozhin’s march on his powerbase. However unsuccessful the march was, it has shaken the Kremlin, Putin’s inner sanctum and Putin himself.