Vladimir Putin is on a high. Kicked out of the G8 in 2014 after the start of his military operations in Ukraine, he’s been making full use of the G20 summit in Osaka to bask in meetings with world grandees and soak up all the international media attention he possibly can, complete with a not very challenging interview with the Financial Times.
Ever the opportunist, he takes what’s on offer, he glides, he smirks. And he watches with glee as we huff and puff at his provocations, whose over-riding purpose is to keep us on edge and play on our divisions.
This is now international showtime for Putin. After all, few people outside Russia paid much attention to his four-hour annual Direct Line TV show last week. I did watch part of it though, and what struck me was that Putin is getting older, and that he’s deploying particularly intensive PR work to try to neutralise a flurry of domestic tensions.
Russian friends tell me the country “feels like 2010, when things were starting to bubble up”, ahead of the street protests that broke out during the following two years. Russia’s economy isn’t doing brilliantly. Putin’s decision to have the investigative journalist Ivan Golunov released and the handing over of the initiative to local protesters in Ekaterinburg in a recent dispute over the building of a cathedral were unexpected developments. OK, this wasn’t the end of political repression, but these were gestures that seemed an attempt to signal a softer touch – if only for now.
As Fiona Hill, one of the best Russia analysts around and now a departing Trump adviser, wrote in her 2012 book, Mr Putin, Operative in the Kremlin: “Uncovering the ‘real Putins’ requires looking beyond the staged performances and the deliberately assumed guises that constitute the Putin political brand.” File the comment to the FT about liberalism being “obsolete” in that category. A few years ago, take note, he was saying the exact opposite, telling us: “I’m a liberal.” Words tossed out like this have little meaning. They’re like small grenades or stink bombs aimed at deepening our self-doubt, despondency and fractiousness.
To fathom this, read Peter Pomerantsev’s book, Nothing is True and Everything is Possible, a memoir from inside Russia’s state propaganda machine. Putin will love western far-left and far-right criticisms of “liberalism”, just as he enjoys whatever anger can be fired up among eastern European politicians who are understandably worried about his next territorial encroachment. To his domestic audience it’s all perfect proof that Russia is back, and its leader is a slick mastermind. Putin is so good at exploiting our obsessions and weak spots: it’s a tactic he’s long perfected to deflect attention from his own record.
Clear the fog a bit, and what is there, really? Russia’s sense of its impunity – I mean big time, murderous, war criminal-style impunity. Think about this: at the end of this year, Russia – whether in its Soviet or post-Soviet incarnations – will have been at war almost continuously for four decades. From the one million civilians killed in the Soviet war in Afghanistan (1979-89) to the hundreds of thousands of Syrians who’ve perished at the receiving end of Russia’s and Assad’s war machine, the chain of impunity is long. See the list of Russian wars: Transnistria (1992), Abkhazia (1992-93), Chechnya (1994-1996 and 1999-2009), Georgia (2008), Ukraine (since 2014), Syria (since 2015). Putin first came to power on the back of a war – in Chechnya – whose atrocities I saw firsthand as a reporter. There is a continuum between the deliberate targeting of hospitals, schools and populated areas by Russian aircraft in Syria and what happened in Chechnya. You cannot understand Putin’s regime, the man himself, his worldview, nor how he’s shaped Russian society, without having those connections in mind.
Just last week the Dutch-led investigation into the 2014 downing of flight MH17 brought an interesting detail to the fore: one of the Russian men charged, Igor Girkin, a former military intelligence officer, had been personally involved in several of the wars listed above. In Chechnya, Girkin took part in mass atrocities, according to the Russian human rights organisation, Memorial.
We tend to look at contemporary Russia in a piecemeal way: one crisis after the other, as if these weren’t linked. Yet they are. For too long we in the west turned a blind eye, or thought some of these wars would remain local issues. We didn’t realise they would come to define Russia’s power structure and how it relates to the outside world. War crimes have gone unpunished for decades, because no one cared internationally or no one was able to do anything, and because Russia has no independent judiciary to speak of.
Of course, Russia isn’t the only country to have waged a long string of wars. Nor the only one to seek to cover up the crimes its forces, militias and hired guns perpetrate. But there are no Chilcot-style inquiries in Russia, no possibility to hold power to account, nor (to date) any whistleblowers exposing misdeeds.
War has been the backdrop to the crushing of political opposition in Russia, to the militarisation of society, to the creation of a personality cult and the thick blanket of propaganda. We cringe when Putin comes up with a crunchy soundbite about “liberalism”, but where are the questions that need to be put directly to him about repeated, deliberate war crimes against civilians, and his responsibility for them?
• Natalie Nougayrède is a Guardian columnist
More people in Russia…
... like you, are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many new organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.
The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.
Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.
We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.
View all comments >
comments (206)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
Natalie Nougayrède is absolutely right on Putin and the appalling history of repression and war. However, you cannot jump to forgetting 'Putin's liberalism jibe' from there. To the contrary, liberals should be very aware of the risk of authoritarianism and populism. And Putin, probably even more than Trump or Johnson, is a dangerous proponent of authoritarianism and populism.
The west particularly the Americans badly mishandled the break up of the Soviet Union. Instead of embracing the new democracy, they decided to punish them. Big mistake.
Voices in places like Poland urged the US to help Russia but were ignored. It was a re-run of Germany after the First World War and boy are we paying for it.
None of this excuses Putin's appalling record and he must be resisted. The best chance the UK has of doing so is as a membe…
The west particularly the Americans badly mishandled the break up of the Soviet Union. Instead of embracing the new democracy, they decided to punish them. Big mistake.
Voices in places like Poland urged the US to help Russia but were ignored. It was a re-run of Germany after the First World War and boy are we paying for it.
None of this excuses Putin's appalling record and he must be resisted. The best chance the UK has of doing so is as a member of the EU, albeit on this matter they are far from perfect. Our detestable Tory government however is enthralled to dirty Russian money. Putin can't believe his luck at how pathetic Britain has become
Also surprised Putin hasn't backed down since Gavin Williamson' decisive statement on the matter
"and boy are we paying for it.
How are we paying for it?
You mean Russia are paying for their murdering ways - assassinations and passenger planes being blown up - with their tiny economy destroyed by sanctions, 144m people with an economy smaller than Italy's.
All the wars mentioned occurred when the UK was in the EU or predecessor.
Easy for a journalist to opine, but like with China, Saudi Arabia etc they have something we need in this supposedly "TINA" globalised world.
Despite her awful premiership and her politics, I have to say Theresa May went up in my estimation slightly today. Her obvious anger at Putin - and that handshake - was probably the first time I saw something I admired in her.
She should have treated him to one of her sneering shoulder-laughs (formerly seen at PMQs).
I agree.
As opposed to hand holding with that nice Mr Trump....hypocrisy on steroids.
She is and always has been way out of her depth.
This country needs a leader like Harold Wilson who stood up for Britain and was no a sychophant to US he sent LBJ away when he wanted us to send troops to Vietnam.
He was a real leader...this nonsense US good Russia bad is infantile and grossly distorted both need to be treated with respect but as a threat.
Comments were opened in error and will be closing shortly. Mr Putin is a very nice man and we'll have none of that western metropolitan liberal elite slander and libel or impertinence. So there.
'hundreds of thousands of Syrians who’ve perished at the receiving end of Russia’s and Assad’s war machine'
No fan of Mr Putin but I read that he had offered to get Assad to move aside in 2012 but the west resisted as they didn't want Russian influence there to increase.
Where did you read that? We'd need a source for that.
Russia have helped Syria use chemical weapons and bombs to kill their own people. Even IF you say happened, it would not have stopped Russia's de facto control of the country, as the Free Syria Rebels were backed by the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside
'Russia proposed more than three years ago that Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, could step down as part of a peace deal, according to a senior negotiator involved in back-channel discussions at the time.
Former Finnish president and Nobel peace prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari said western powers failed to seize on the proposal. Since it was made, in 2012, tens of thousands of people have been killed and millions uprooted, causing the world’s gravest refugee crisis since the second world war'
"Russia have helped Syria use chemical weapons".
What "chemical weapons" are those? Are you referring to Douma?
Putin is right about liberalism being obsolete because he helped manufactured and continues to manufacture the apparatus to dismantle it. He is someone who just seeks attention and wealth and is taking an extreme route to get it.
This is utter claptrap. Liberalism remains strong - the latest examples are that Erdogan losing in Istanbul, the Germans taking 1m Syrians and the UK has turned to a Remain country over the last 3 years. Hong Kong reacting against China. The removal of a blatant corrupt President in the Ukraine.
Putin is not dismantling LIberalism. For every example you could give there is a counter example of Liberalism triumphing.
Natalie Nougayrède is absolutely right on Putin and the appalling history of repression and war. However, you cannot jump to forgetting 'Putin's liberalism jibe' from there. To the contrary, liberals should be very aware of the risk of authoritarianism and populism. And Putin, probably even more than Trump or Johnson, is a dangerous proponent of authoritarianism and populism.
Putin is the capo di tutti capi of the worldwide neo-fascist insurgency.
Follow the money
One source on Wiki puts US military spending at $649 billion.
Number one by a long way.
Russia is only 7th at, on this estimate, $61.4bn
So Natalie, let me try again as I was deleted. I'm looking forward to your examination of relative war machines on this planet in the light of this.
Yes. This. A million times this.
The man runs an economic and political pygmy, with a joke military which wouldn't last 5 minutes in any conflict with a well armed Western power like France, Israel, or even the UK, let alone the US military. Let's not pay Putin too much attention, eh?
eh? I thought he had numerous ICBMs: he'd incinerate France before their tanks had crossed the border with Germany
If those ICBMs even get out of their silos, France's Force de Frappe would annihilate Russia in short order. I'm not saying that's a great outcome, but there it is!
Are we talking about the same France that during the illegal bombing campaign on Libya, had to beg the americans to help them out, since they run out of missiles?
It looks like he's chosen Georgia as his foreign distraction this year.
The graun needs to massively increase its circulation for this message to get across.
Putin is the new 'normal', the west is in decline.
There is ample evidence to show Putin's wish for military expansion. But the little reported issue of 86% of Russia's assets being owned by its oligarchs is a far more relevant indication of their designs. With that kind of clout you can't merely own property in London, you can utilise such massive wealth to operate the 'dirty tricks department' that influences and de-stabilises elections the world over.
This is a far more potent weapon than either the conventional mode of weaponry and war; it's also more successful than the capacity to carry out clandestine secret service operations. De-stabilising other regimes is a prime objective for states with hidden agendas. It's just a real shame that Russia is not the only player in this game - but it is one whereby massive assets are concentrated among a tiny minority.
What is the equivalent stat for the USA?
With the vast size of their country,the harshness of climate,having suffered invasion and bordering so many dangerous nations,I don`t expect Russian leaders to be in the same mould as western European ones.Maybe we should try to be a little bit more understanding of the cultural differences between us.
That's no excuse for Russia invading their neighbours.
At least Putin ended the Syrian war and defeated ISIS, the man is a nasty piece of sh*t but he knows how to win a war.
The same could have been said about Stalin. But he was still a monster.
Without Stalin Europe world still be talking German and without Putin the caliphate would still be thriving.
And without Stalin millions of innocent people wouldn’t have received NKVD bullet in the back of the neck.
He correct regarding liberalism.
He correct
Me hungry.
Me Tarzan.
What he means is Liberalism is dead in Russia, its still alive and kicking in most of the EU
Most of Europe
What he said is that, while Liberalism still has its place, it cannot be dictated to everyone globally, In his own words (emphasis mine):
Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment