An old Russia thrives in the here and now. Several undesirable features of past centuries of authoritarian rule prevail as standard practice in the current Russia. The repression of tsarist autocracy with its early institutionalized secret police became more pervasive in 20th century Soviet society. The latter gave way to Stalinist terror of which some of the worst elements are reflected in Vladimir Putin’s 21st century Russia. And now, Russian chauvinism has found new expression in a regime composed of self-dealing, servile functionaries whose devotion to their resident despot remains a top priority.
Putin consolidated his power by resurrecting the familiar Russian “strong man” ideal of leadership with his brutal assault upon the Chechen Republic in 1999 after promoting a national crisis of his making. A post-Soviet revival of Russia’s traditional sense of spiritualism was infused into an overly expressed sense of historic patriotism that recalled past imperial glory and gave birth to a malevolent nationalism. This one would be ripe for conflict fueled by an ingrained hatred for the West.
A continued centralization of Putin’s authority guaranteed his own security and longevity as dictator along with his vision of Russian hegemony which would now become doctrine. One is reminded of the Orwellian notion of nationalism as power hunger tempered by self-deception wherein any form of rationalization for one’s actions becomes justified in upholding the doctrinal narrative. The beliefs of a poorly constrained authoritarian regime remain deaf to counterargument whether based on legal precedent or moral ground. All that matters is the advancement of doctrine.
Putin’s agenda in Ukraine and elsewhere along Russia’s western border with Europe is immutable and silly notions of seeking compromise, in Putin’s way of thinking, only create opportunity to continue a charade wherein Western anxiety is periodically placated. The current U.S. position in this regard has fallen far short of its original goal of seeking a ceasefire. The overconfident belief that it could exert influence over the Kremlin, the aggressor in this war, by first acceding to its demands before any serious negotiations tool place was poorly conceived. The only effective negotiation that can take place with a Russian dictator who has accumulated a legacy of war crimes is one where he is made to realize in no uncertain terms what will happen if it fails. The failure in not delivering such a message falls primarily upon the Trump administration and its current pointless and ineffectual involvement in this affair.
This therefore commits Europe to act decisively and avoid Churchill’s fateful warning about “the confirmed unteachability of mankind.” Otherwise, it will be left, once again, to deal with a malign Russia for generations to come and nowhere to look but inward.
Copyright @Kost Elisevich, MD, PhD 2025. All rights reserved. Any illegal reproduction of this content will result in immediate legal action.
