Earlier this year, observers declared that the Kremlin would have to suddenly change the agenda in order to find a way out from the conflict in Ukraine. This is exactly what he’s done in Syria.
.. We often see figures on the differing resources of the US and Russia, the consequences of falling oil prices and sanctions on the Russian economy. Putin, it seems, doesn’t have the resources to continue raising the stakes. But while this assertion is correct, the timeline is unclear—perhaps seven or ten years of economic sanctions will lead to catastrophic economic collapse in Russia. You can achieve a lot in that time.
.. In 2015, the Kremlin put the word ‘partners’ to one side. Now it uses the word ironically: ‘so-called partners’. Six or seven years has passed since Putin’s 2007 speech in Munich and Dmitry Medvedev’s announcement of a new contract for collective security in Europe in 2009—this was the last time the Kremlin called western leaders partners.
Now the Kremlin is saying the following: the collective security issue and a second Helsinki Pact are off the table. You didn’t agree back then, and now we’re raising the stakes. You’ll have to evacuate not only the train stations in Paris and Brussels, but Prague too.
Instead, there’s a terrible suspicion in the air: hybrid warfare—no matter who conducts it, or where—is profitable for the Kremlin. Russia is a far different source of power today than it was in September 2001.
Looking at the Kremlin’s tactics, many people see signs of the anti-liberal, revanchist rhetoric of 1930s Europe, the provocative actions characteristic of Mussolini and Hitler. And they’re right: the Kremlin is playing the ‘politics of increasing uncertainty’. Moreover, it’s playing this game whilst democracy is in crisis, and millions are on Putin’s side.