Posts Tagged ‘Putin’

Russia Russia Russia

Posted: July 1, 2023 in Geopolitics
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

by Richard Martin

There are NO, I repeat, NO, independent power sources in Russia. In that it is a typical autocratic dictatorship. Anyone who opposes Putin and the Kremlin apparatus, openly or secretly, gets “fallen” out of a window, poisoned, arrested on trumped up charges and sent to Siberia. That includes the robber baron oligarchs, all news and media, the judiciary, governors and assemblies of the so-called republics, oblasts, cities, towns, etc.

He has numerous agencies, official (e.g., the armed forces and FSB) and unofficial (Wagner, the Internet Research Agency) in competition vying for his approval and attention. They have overlapping functions, which is completely intentional. They are run by people who are personally loyal to Putin or to people who are.

All individual wealth, influence, and power is held at the sufferance of Putin. As soon as someone with official or unofficial delegated powers steps out of line, they are warned or disappeared in some way. Their wealth is confiscated and distributed to other cronies.

Prigozhin’s Putsch

Posted: June 25, 2023 in War
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

By Richard Martin

Thanks to Professor Sean Maloney of RMC for naming what happened in Russia on 23-24 June 2023. We can analyze the events, but we can’t apply a Western framework or look at them through a liberal-democratic lens. 

Putin, Kremlin operators, siloviki, Wagner and other mercenary groups, are nothing but opportunists seeking power and wealth. There are multiple security agencies and forces within the state apparatus which can play a part. People are loyal to individuals, not the constitution or the people or even the state. The state for these strongmen is a means to an end. When they can no longer get what they want from the existing network, they will make a play to rearrange it in their favour, or at least position themselves to wait out the changes.

What this is not: a mutiny, popular uprising, foco, or a coup d’état. Mutiny may be feeding the putsch, but if the troops had wanted to mutiny en masse (it has happened in pockets prior to the Wagner putsch), they would have done so by now. Mutiny also implies that the troops are no longer okay with the mission, and just don’t want to be slaughtered or treated like cattle for nothing. There is no indication, yet, that there is sufficient discontent or organized resistance within the ranks.

There is also no uprising on in Russia, although there may be much popular discontent and rebelliousness and the situation can change quickly. Most people, including local and provincial government authorities will wait to see which way the wind is blowing. As for a coup, that would be staged from within the immediate circle of power, the Kremlin, or at the most Moscow, and would have to involve those closest to Putin and within his security apparatus and network.

This is a putsch, a push for power by a group, usually from outside the capital. It involves turning groups and leaders against the central government, especially those in control of security and military forces. A historical analogy is to be found in imperial Rome, where rebellions almost always started in the provinces, usually Gaul, Hispanic, or Syria, because there was a good wealth base, and during a period of instability or a losing war/battle.

Soldiers in various legions would proclaim their general as imperator, which means victor, or great commander. Then they would march on Rome or to meet opposing forces in battle who trying to do the same thing. Sometimes, there would be forces loyal to the reigning emperor who would try to support him. The motivation was a play for power and wealth. Those supporting the leaders throw in with the one they think will guarantee them the best spoils or, alternatively, avoid them being killed.

Another analogy is a game of musical chairs. The music is cacophonous, with instruments out of tune, multiple scores, and several conductors. No one knows when the music will stop. Some key players are jockeying for position, while others are waiting in the wings to try to get to a chair or to fall in behind the winner(s).

I think the trigger for Prigozhin to launch his putsch was the incursions in the Belgorod region a few weeks ago by Russian rebels supported by Ukrainian capabilities. When he saw how weak the forces outside of Ukraine were, he felt he could reach Moscow quickly if he could rally enough support.

When Prigozhin realized he didn’t have enough units coming over to him, and especially the internal security forces, that’s when he called off the march on Moscow. It had nothing to do with buses and trucks blocking the highway or “negotiations.” His putsch failed, as most do, because he gambled and lost.

It’s also interesting to note that the Kremlin keeps its best forces to protect Moscow and the Kremlin (which literally means fortress). In Russia, all roads lead to Moscow, so it’s part of the mentality that it must be protected at all costs.

None of these strongmen are democrats or true reformers. They are fighting to see who will be on top of the pyramid, nothing more. And that includes Saint Navalny and Khodorkovsky the former oligarch. They have no honour and will throw each other under the tank if they think it will advance their chances of moving up the hierarchy.

It’s also important to mention that none of these men thinks the idea of invading Ukraine was a bad idea. They all want it and will do everything they can to continue the war. And can we finally lay to rest the idea of peace feelers, peace talks, giving peace a chance? They need to be wiped out.

© 2023 Richard Martin

What Fascism Really Is

Posted: March 6, 2022 in Geopolitics, History, Political Philosophy, War
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1

By Richard Martin

Fascism is the worldview, the Weltanschauung, that sees the grassroots, deeply felt social solidarity and cohesion of nations as both a model and a threat. Fascism is thus an attempt to recreate the same level and type of social cohesion as what reigns seemingly naturally and effortlessly in liberal democracies, but from the top down, rather than the bottom up and laterally between individuals.

Similarly to socialism, fascism sees independent centres of social solidarity, cooperation, and community as threats to this top-down cohesion. Both are inherently collectivist in nature, but in different ways. Whereas socialism and its revolutionary incarnation, communism, see these threats and the need to united authority and control in terms of transnational classes and other categories (e.g., gender, sex, race), fascism sees the nation or people (e.g., German Volk) as the basis of top-down control, authority, and cohesion.

German National Socialism (i.e., Nazism) and Italian Fascism were the primary incarnations of “small f” fascism in the 1st half of the 20th century, with the disastrous consequences of World War 2 as main effects.

Current Russian nationalism, let’s call it Putinism, is a variety and instantiation of “small f” fascism. When I say, “small f,” I specifically mean that it stems from the same worldview as Italian Fascism and German Nazism of the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. That worldview interprets Western power and, especially, success, prosperity, and cultural attractiveness as a threat to the solidarity, cohesion, and security of the Russian nation, defined in a wide sense to include White Russians (Belarusians) and Little Russians (Ukrainians) in addition to Great Russians (Russians proper).

From this perspective, Putinism is an ideology of resentment, envy, frustration, and anger. It views all Western influences as subversive of Russian purity and security. The military doctrine of Russian “hybrid war” (gybridnaya voyna) tries to distill the secrets of Western success and cultural magnetism as encroachments and offensive manoeuvres. It identifies a “Western playbook” for world hegemony, particularly from the American perspective, and tries to apply the same playbook to Russian defence and counter-encroachment.

Western observers who say that Russia’s concerns vis à vis NATO, the United States, Europe… and Ukraine, fall into the trap of accepting Kremlin claims of being surrounded and under foreign domination and threat of invasion at face value. Just like Russian fascists and other Putinists around the world, they are blinded to the basic truth that Western, and especially American/Anglo-Saxon cultural, political, social, and economic “hegemony” stem from the inherent attractiveness and magnetism of Western values and civilization, not from any master plan for world domination. (That would also include those in the West who fear the World Economic Forum.)

This article is just a first installment of what is proving to be a fundamental metanoia for me. It is a journey of “seeing through the world.” I hope you will accompany me on this adventure.

© Richard Martin

Richard Martin was infantry officer in the Canadian Army. He is now an entrepreneur, trusted strategic advisor, and information warrior focusing on extracting valuable lessons and signals from chaos and noise.

Know what kind of struggle your engaged in

Posted: September 16, 2013 in Geopolitics
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

The great 19th century military theorist Clausewitz wrote that — I’m paraphrasing here — the first and most important task of a leader is to understand the type of conflict or struggle he is engaged in. Poker players apparently have a more mundane way of putting things. If you’re the only one at the table who’s wondering who the patsy is, then you’re it.

In the last week we’ve seen just how amateurish the Obama administration is when it comes to the Great Game of great power relations, war, and diplomacy. The Keystone Cops routine that is the Obama policy on Syria’s use of chemical weapons would be funny were the consequences and implications not so deadly and ominous. President Putin of Russia is not so dilettantish in his approach to Syria. He sees the civil war there as a struggle to maintain and reinforce his influence with thugish regimes all around the world. It is also a confirmation within Russia, if any was needed, of his status as a classic strongman. The situation is even starker for Assad, for whom this war is not just a political struggle, but a fight to the death. Given what has happened to other dictators after their downfall throughout the world (Mubarak, Khaddafi, Saddam), it’s not surprising that he sees things in this light. The US is playing with its credibility and standing on the world stage and its ability to influence the policies and alignments of other nations. Obama is also gambling with the prerogatives of the office of president as commander-in-chief. All because he apparently doesn’t have the stomach for the fight — which came with the job — or because he doesn’t realize how significant the current crisis is.

We can see this all the time in organizations and business. A market leading company sees a new product as a minor irritant or insignificant (as one of RIM’s co-CEOs Mike Laziridis said on seeing the first iPhone) whereas the attacker sees it as a matter of life and death. An executive is playing nice, but there are other people in the company who are gunning for his position.

Food for Thought
Are you in a fight? Do you know its nature? Do you competitors or opponents view it in the same light? Are you willing to pay the price to win or to “fall on your sword”?

© 2013 Richard Martin. Reproduction and quotes are permitted with proper attribution.

The Great Game Is On — Wake Up Obama!

Posted: August 9, 2013 in Geopolitics
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

The Obama Administration seems quite clueless about realpolitik. It’s foreign policy reduces to “be nice and hope for the best.” They need to grow some cojones. Cancelling a meeting with Putin is nothing compared to real leverage.

The Russians are not Western allies, and never have been. I think I read last week or something in the WSJ that Putin is a classic strongman. He has to be perceived as strong in order to maintain his power. If he looses power, he’s probably going to end up the same way that Mubarak did in Egypt, which is also what awaits Assad. Or worse, like Saddam or Khaddafi.

The US and its Western allies should be doing things to put Putin on the spot and force him back. But since Obama came to power, there has been nothing but “strong words” and posturing, but no real action, from what I can perceive. The idea of cancelling plans for ballistic missile defence in eastern Europe without any Russian concessions set the tone. The Russians are trying to push everyone around in the Arctic. Surely there is something to be done.

On the other hand, I don’t perceive that the US has a very strong hand right now. For instance, NASA is completely dependent on the Russians for sending astronauts into space and bringing them back. The Russians have maintained their position in space and consequently have a lot of concrete leverage. They also send a lot of natural gas to Europe. The Western countries have been saving the Russians from themselves since the end of the Cold War by helping them disarm and clean up their nuclear mess. However, striking at that might not be a good idea because it could lead to proliferation.

If the Obama administration isn’t doing this kind of assessment, they need to start right now and use it to good effect. Why not expulse a few Russian diplomats? I’m sure there are few that could be caught spying. Or how about saying something to embarass Putin, put him on the spot and diminish him in the eyes of the Russian people?

The Great Game is on (it was never off), so Obama needs to get in gear and start pressuring the Soviets… oops I mean the Russians. Talk is good, but so is real leverage.

© 2013 Richard Martin. Reproduction and quotes permitted with full and proper attribution.