Andrey Vladimirovich Kozyrev is a Russian politician who served as the minister for foreign affairs under President Boris Yeltsin from 1990 to 1996. In a series of tweets, he has sought to answer the question: is Vladimir Putin a rational actor?
First of all, I want to examine where the questioning of Putin’s rationality started. I think it began because most people, particularly in the West, view his decision to invade Ukraine as utterly irrational. I disagree. It’s horrific, but not irrational.
To understand why the invasion was rational for Putin, we have to step into his shoes. Three beliefs came together at the same time in his calculus:
1. Ukraine’s condition as a country;
2. Russian military’s condition;
3. The West’s geopolitical condition.
Ukraine’s condition
Putin spent the last 20 years believing that Ukraine is not a real nation and, at best, should be a satellite state. Maidan ended any hope of keeping Ukraine independent and pro-Kremlin. He thought the West was behind it. If Ukraine’s government cannot be kept independent and pro-Kremlin covertly, as he likely concluded, then he will overtly force it to be. He also started to believe his own propagandists that Ukraine is run by a Nazi-Bandera junta. Perfect pretext to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.
Russian military
The Kremlin spent the last 20 years trying to modernise its military. Much of that budget was stolen and spent on mega-yachts in Cyprus. But as a military advisor you cannot report that to the president. So they reported lies to him instead. Potemkin military.
The West
The Russian ruling elite believed its own propaganda that President Biden is mentally inept. They also thought the EU was weak because of how toothless their sanctions were in 2014. And then the US botched its withdrawal from Afghanistan, solidifying this narrative.
If you believe all three of the above to be true and your goal is to restore the glory of the Russian empire (whatever that means), then it is perfectly rational to invade Ukraine.
He miscalculated on all three, but that doesn’t make him insane. Simply wrong and immoral.
I will take it a step further. The threat of nuclear war is another example of his rationality. The Kremlin knows it can try to extract concessions, whether from Ukraine or the West, by sabre-rattling its last remaining card in the deck: nuclear weapons.
The ultimate conclusion here is that the West should not agree to any unilateral concessions or limit its support of Ukraine too much for the fear of nuclear war.
Thanks for your clear and cogent detailing of factors playing into Putin’s decisions Andrey – and for your conclusion that we must not submit to threat of nuclear war. I regard this is a mistake that we have already made, and an immoral one, as defending Ukraine is not the same as invading Russia no matter Putin’s assertion that defence of Ukraine is an attack on Russia. I feel sick and angry that we do not protect their airspace as requested despite seeing them die and their homeland decimated. Inaction also demonstrates that nuclear weapons can control NATO which seems likely to lead to proliferation.
Interesting insider view, should be more of it, and one would also be interested in how influential had been Putin’s Rasputin or Steve Bannon like figure (or Dominic Cummings), i.e. Alexander Dugin?
Amongst his ramblings round ‘Eurasia’ he had proposed the need to take over Ukraine, then Central Asia and ‘dismantle China’; the latter is ignored by especially Anglo media linking Xi – Putin as a ‘partnership’ (technically impossible) for domestic political agitprop e.g. US NYT/WSJ Biden – Dems ‘weak’, OZ ‘medium’ ALP are ‘Manchurians’ etc.
Contradicted by the worship of Dugin, like Putin, not just by the far right in Europe and US, but also religious and political conservatives with antipathy towards anything non European.
From the CARR Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right, by Lyanageo 29 Oct ’19 in ‘Aleksandr Dugin’s Ideology Echoes Through the Alt-Right‘ (the latter also echoes through Anglo white Christian nationalists)
‘The relative obscurity of Dugin’s work in Western countries may have kept these links vague, but the fingerprints of Eurasianism are visible….A suitable signpost can be, “Beware of preachers of Duginism.”
https://www.radicalrightanalysis.com/2019/10/29/aleksandr-dugins-ideology-echoes-through-the-alt-right/
Maybe Mr Kozyrev is on the right track here..the EU/NATO should apply some pushback with a hint of further negotiation after the Russian ‘special military operation’ had been rolled back to their side of the border…
And what about good old ‘access to resources’ as a reason to invade. Ukraine is the size of France and mostly good agricultural land, plus 44 million inhabitants. It used to be where most of USSRs military gear was made I believe.
That’s a big chunk of resources that Russia can use to remain relevant and to support its military and economy, things that sooner or later will be needed to prevent Russia losing Siberia to the Chinese.
Ukraine also has lots of valuable minerals.
Mr Kozyrev has an axe to grind against Putin. I take his views with a pinch of salt on my daily propaganda serve.
Yes.
When Putin came to power Yeltsin was scared Putin will treat him like he, Yeltsin, treated Gorbatschow, which wasn’t nice. In fact Yeltsin behaved appallingly towards Gorbatschow. His fears didn’t eventuate. But maybe Putin was less obliging towards the members of Yeltsin’s cabinet. He sure wasn’t very nice towards many others who benefited from the staggering corruption during Yeltsin’s reign.