A blog of the Kennan Institute
Moscow, Russia – The Tsar’s Bell rises with the Kremlin in the background.
Shutterstock. com/D. Bond
The end of 2024 brought a series of significant setbacks for Vladimir Putin: the collapse of the Assad regime, an environmental crisis in the Black Sea, the closure of the main oil pipeline to Europe, and the alienation of key Russian allies like Russia. Hungary and Slovakia. Array However, Putin’s New Year’s message remained optimistic. He looked forward to the upcoming 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Germany in World War II, ensuring the nation’s strength. He praised the Russian military for defining the homeland as it has its history and insisted that destiny remains on Russia’s side.
What went unmentioned was that this New Year’s Eve marked the 25th anniversary of Putin’s rise to power. At the turn of the millennium, few in Moscow could have predicted the epoch-defining shift that would occur when an unknown and untested figure ascended to the presidency.
In 2000, Vladimir Putin was a relatively obscure bureaucrat with a “deer in the headlights” demeanor, seemingly plucked from nowhere when Boris Yeltsin anointed him as his successor. He had no national reputation, no prominent political allies, and no clear constituency. But we quickly learned more about him. Unlike his predecessors, Putin was the first Russian leader in centuries who had not been born in a village—a sign, perhaps, of a more modern and urbanized era.
We also learned about Putin’s past. His defining Soviet experience was the defense of the KGB headquarters in Dresden and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Despite this, he was not a communist ideologue. He would later criticize Lenin for structuring the Soviet Union as a collection of national republics, a move he believed would have paved the way for its dissolution into 15 independent countries. This perspective most likely influenced Putin’s resolution not to commemorate the centenary of the Russian Revolution in 2017. In Putin’s early years, Russia was active with Western institutions, joining the WTO, the European Court of Human Rights, and the new (for Russia) G8. However, Putin’s ambition to integrate Russia into the West is a relic. A true return to this trajectory will probably not be achieved without the emergence of a truly post-Soviet generation capable of reshaping Russia’s relations with the world.
Putin declared in his New Year’s address that the foundations of Russia were solid. But everyday realities contradict this optimism. The list of economic problems – catastrophic interest rates, labor shortages, inflation, a collapsing ruble – all signal that the economic and social tensions lack easy solutions and most likely will linger even after the war ends.
In his speech, Puttin emphasized the issue of sovereignty over all other foreign policy goals, but it turns out that sovereignty is just another catchword for isolation. Russia touts the BRICS expansion to rebut the charge of financial decline, but new members such as Ethiopia, Egypt, and Iran will not overcome European and U.S. sanctions anytime soon. And even China – Russia’s partner in Putin’s new multipolar world – is wary of running afoul of secondary sanctions from the West because of its dealings with Russia.
One looks for a glimmer of optimism in Putin’s speech, but the only word of encouragement is Putin’s declaration that everything will be fine. But hope is not a strategy. Putin says Russia continues to advance, but gives no idea in which direction. Patriotism and love of country can only take you so far. If this fails to be social for his regime, Putin’s only reaction will be to redouble repression again. Putin has already ordered the FSB to investigate spies living among the Russian people.
After a quarter century in power, Putin sees himself as a global leader. In reality, he is a foreign pariah who cannot travel to many countries due to an outstanding ICC arrest warrant for the kidnapping of youths in Ukraine.
Ironically, Putin faces the same demanding situations that caused the collapse of the Soviet Union: economic stagnation, a military quagmire and growing concerns about social unrest. Speaking of the Soviet Union, Prime Minister Mishustin just announced his own five-year term. economic progression plan including primary state infrastructure projects and the progression of the Far East and the Arctic Circle. However, the 1990s and the Wild East are vague memories. Instead of foreign investment and the lure of emerging markets, Russia will have to face the challenge of Putin’s deprivatization (confiscation) of Western companies, without any compensation. This is a challenge that will have to be addressed in the future.
After 25 years in power, Putin must, one way or another, start anew. But 60-year-old men with decades of life are smart replacement agents. Indeed, Putin’s New Year’s speech suggests that a new era of stagnation awaits Russia, peppered with platitudes about an excellent afterlife and devoid of any genuine basis for optimism or opportunities.
Indeed, when I lived in Moscow on the eve of the new millennium, I interacted with many young professionals – lawyers, entrepreneurs, businessmen, journalists, financial consultants – who bet that Russia could change. That bet has been lost.
So, what awaits Putin’s 26th year in power? There are several draft laws and policy recommendations circulating around the Kremlin that range from bad to worse to hopeless. In order to address Russia’s chronic demographic crisis, Putin has tasked the head of the Federation Council Valentina Matvienko to increase the birthrate to 10 children per woman. There is also draft legislation that in the name of sovereignty, Russia should banish foreign-derived words from its vocabulary. Foreign music is also in the crosshairs of the Duma.
Putin still has his wits about him. His annual marathon call-in show lasted four hours. A considerable feat of stamina and recall for a man his age. His New Year’s message, however, did not inspire similar confidence. After 25 years in power, Putin has run out of ideas.
The reviews expressed in this article are exclusive to the Kennan Institute and do not reflect those of the Kennan Institute.