Tuesday, 8 March 2022

001: Reading Putin's Mind


 


In the last two weeks, several commentators including seasoned Kremlin-watchers have complained they can’t make out what is going on in Putin’s head. Has he lost all reason? Has the covid isolation affected him?

 

In this series called “Putin’s Last War”, I would like to make a foolhardy attempt of predicting how and when this war will end. The starting point in that analytical process is to read Putin’s mind.

 

I lived in Russia from 1986 to 1999, and left Russia three months before Putin took charge. (My leaving and Putin’s arrival were unrelated events). Since the time Putin appeared on screen, I have been watching him, his interviews, his speeches, his annual conferences where he answered questions from journalists and Russian people. I always watch him in the original; much may be lost in translation.

 

Here I will try to create a profile of Putin’s mind based on 20+ years of watching his clips, analyzing actions that accompany his words and applying logic to decode his mind.

***** 

Putin’s mind is focused on two key issues:

(a) to be in power till the last day of his life

(b) to protect his life from all threats- internal and external.

 

Such a mission should not surprise us. Dictators everywhere want to hang on to power eternally and die a natural death if they believe in their mortality at all. What is different about Putin’s mind when you compare it to say Saddam’s or Kim Jong-un’s?

 

Putin, unlike other dictators, strives for legitimacy, respectability, and dignity. He doesn’t mind being called a dictator or ruling for ever. He was born in a country where dictators ruling till death was a norm. He doesn’t feel there is anything wrong with it. (Neither do his supporters).

 

However, he wants legitimacy. Putin is a law graduate. Certainly, in the first decade of his rule, he tried to manipulate things so that in letter, if not in spirit, his actions were legitimate. Hence, the farce of swapping titles with a puppet called Medvedev for four years. (To avoid serving three consecutive terms as President which was unconstitutional, Putin became Russia’s Prime Minister 2008-2012. Except the title, nothing changed).

 

Putin also aspires for respectability. America is not only his arch-enemy. The US president is a benchmark for him. If the US president is Coca-Cola, he wants to be Pepsi-Cola, not Tarkhun. Every US president he meets is much taller than him, that makes him hugely uncomfortable. With all his power and weapons, height is one thing he can’t alter. However, in Russian media, State-choreographed, he makes sure he is usually shown with both leaders sitting in their chairs, and not standing side-by-side.

 

Why is this point important?  Because his behavior depends on this perceived equal status. He was on his best behavior when Donald Trump was America’s president. Suddenly, for the first time, the world found Putin more rational, more coherent, more strategic, easier to deal with. From 2017-2020, Putin felt most secure. He had crushed Chechnya during Bill Clinton’s tenure, invaded Georgia with George W. Bush as his opposing number, grabbed Crimea and bombarded Syrians during Obama’s time, and now has invaded Ukraine once Biden took over.

 

Absolutely no war, invasion, or mass destruction during Trump’s years. It may be a coincidence, but I don’t think it was. I firmly believe that if Trump had won a second term, we wouldn’t have seen Ukraine’s invasion this year. Because with Trump on the other side of the ocean, Putin felt secure.

***** 

What is this insecurity I am talking about?

 

When Putin talks about Russia’s security concerns, he means his personal security concerns. He is intelligent and rational enough to understand there is no retired life for him. He is unlikely to be an ex-president, only a late president. If he doesn’t die in office, he may face a lengthy imprisonment, possibly torture. That is what frightens him the most, because he knows well what torture and imprisonment mean. I would add to his mission: (a) always in power (b) don’t get captured (c) don’t get tortured (d) don’t get imprisoned (e) don’t get executed.

 

These are normal human desires. However, in the minds of Presidents, all emotions get astronomically amplified. Their egos, their greed, their fears, their paranoia are of a size ordinary people can’t imagine. Presidents are human, and they can take earth-shattering decisions to preserve themselves, even when they talk of preserving their nations.

 

In 2001, George W. Bush was a terrified man. Compared to Trump and Putin, a likeable man, Bush had smelled death. Had he been in Capitol Hill on 11 September and the fourth plane had succeeded, he would have joined the list of assassinated presidents. My hypothesis is that his subconscious motivation in wanting to wipe out Afghanistan and also get rid of Saddam Hussein was his desire to remain alive, nothing to do with America. Usama Bin Laden might not succeed in assassinating me, and Saddam may not have chemical weapons, but who wants to take a chance? Let me just go and wipe out everything. That’s the way it works with Putin.

 

Why should Russia, with the highest number of nuclear warheads and the largest territory in the world, have security concerns? No, it is simply an illogical propaganda. This is shown by years of Soviet/Russian appeasement by the West, and even today by NATO standing on the sidelines watching Putin wreck Ukraine.

 

Putin’s security concerns are always about his person. In his last few speeches, he mentions the names of NATO’s short-range missiles and their capability to reach Moscow. He knows that from Ukraine it may be easier to target him by escaping the defensive shields. He is not worried about nuclear attacks on Russia, he is scared about falling victim to a precision weapon.

 

That is the reason why financial and other sanctions, however devastating, don’t bother him. They don’t threaten his life. Russia will be poorer, Russians will be poorer, but Russia has enough resources to keep him in power for his remaining life.

 

(Continued: More on Putin’s mind tomorrow.)

Ravi

12 comments:

  1. I think Putin has Inferiority Complex

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm going to wait for your next one, the conclusion, before commenting 🖖

    ReplyDelete
  3. Interesting perspective Ravi.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just in case, under Clinton, Putin was nearly noone and Chechnya was crushed by Yeltsin.

    Ravi: "This is shown by years of Soviet/Russian appeasement by the West".

    So relentless NATO's Drang nach Osten since 1997 was in fact appeasement.
    I heard that news with interest.

    Here is the opinion on this issue of W. Burns (US Ambassador to Russia in 2005-2008). This is from his  A Memoir of American Diplomacy and the Case for Its Renewal.

    In 2007, he emphasised 3 key issues in relations with Russia: the recognition of Kosovo, the inclusion of Ukraine and Georgia in NATO, the deployment of a missile defense system in Europe. To save relations, he advised pushing through just recognition of Kosovo, postponing the inclusion of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO "until better times" and cooperating with Russia on missile defense systems.
    The Bush administration ostentatiously forced through all three decisions, ignoring Moscow's protests and concerns.

    This sort of appeasement is remarkable.

    The analysis of how Putin is scared for his life, I understand, is based on similar watertight assumptions.

    Sadly, 99% of analysis that I see now on the current NATO/Russia stand-off is based on an  an assumption of similar quality - that the West had no role in this crysis or it is a matter of Putin being a coward.
    I will try to look for more and maybe find something more relevant. Knowing that even if i find the one, it will never make it to the mainstream media. Like for instance this old piece.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alexey, you are talking of the first Chechen war (Yeltsin). But the second Chechen war (1999) was by Putin.

      Delete
    2. When the 2nd war in Chechnya got started Putin was the Head of FSB.
      He had to finish it as President, yes, but he has not started it.

      Delete
    3. This may not be factually correct. Putin became Russia's president on 9 August 1999, and Russia's massive aerial campaign started later that month.

      Delete
  5. https://youtu.be/Nbj1AR_aAcE

    Just in case, the comment below is not m8ne.

    This is not brief, 1:21 mins of talk by an American Professor John Mearsheimer on who has been stoking the fire in Ukraine. Talk was 10 days ago, before Russia's current offensive but you can draw conclusion on the unlikely military response from NATO and the likely outcome. He also sees the end of US led Unipolar World and the emergence of a Multipolar World. A breathtaking analysis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alexey, yes, I have listened to Prof. John Mearsheimer's lectures, and I admire him. A multipolar world where all sides are equally democratic is fine. When the choice is between Democracy/freedom of speech on one hand, and a repressive dictatorship on the other, why would Ukraine or any other country choose Russia?

      Delete
    2. So i see, the West had no role in this tragedy, it was a matter of Ukrainian people choosing democracy over dictatorship.
      Noted.
      Why would they need to choose Russia in this dilemma? Was Finland or Austria compelled to choose democracy/dictatorship by staying neutral?

      Delete
    3. West certainly had a big role by their provocation and inaction. I will write about it. That doesn't justify devastating Ukraine. Finland is thinking of joining the NATO now. Does that give Russia an option of bombing them?

      Delete
    4. You twist the logic here.
      It is the the other way round and very simple - no NATO (plus democracy or whatever you want), no bombing.
      Finland's and Austria's neutrality for 60 years proved this as a practical solution.
      This is not to say that i find this tragedy a solution either. Russia retreated for 25 years before NATO so possibly there was a space for new retreat. Possibly Zelensky's voiced intention to go nuclear made the difference. No idea.
      I just see that a sheerly geopolitical standoff is overwhelmingly disguised in the West as ideological. What a sham.

      Delete

Sanctions Removal

  Article 8: Removal of sanctions Subject to agreement and implementation of the above articles (1-7), and demonstration of good faith by al...