The Most Serious Cracks Emerged Within Russia’s Society and Putin is Torn Between the Dire Cost of Either Defeat or Victory.

The Russian war on Ukraine has truly become a stumbling block that threatens to lead the Russian Federation towards disintegration and collapse. The mutiny of the chief of PMC Wagner Yevgeny Prigozhin has exposed more than just the cracks in the walls of the Kremlin, seat of President Vladimir Putin. It has exposed serious divisions within Russian society itself. It has revealed the Russians’ frustration with their country’s involvement in the Ukrainian war, their anger towards the dismal performance of their military, and their fear of a second wave of mobilization for a war that would only increase in brutality, if Russia is to secure any chance of victory, even a pyrrhic one. What will Putin do in the face of the military’s determination to remove the ‘white gloves’ to avert an inevitable defeat in Ukraine? Furthermore, how will the United States respond to the fractures within the Russian system and society? Will it be daunted by the prospect of instability and chaos, or will it remain indifferent, knowing that the final collapse of the Russian empire would be profoundly and inherently advantageous for Europe??

?

For President Putin, July 12, 2023, will serve as a painful reminder of the grave error he committed on December 17, 2021, when he issued a warning to NATO member states, demanding written security guarantees that would explicitly include a commitment against expanding NATO membership and a promise to prevent Ukraine's accession to the alliance. On that day, when the upcoming NATO summit convenes in Vilnius, Lithuania, Finland will have already joined the alliance, to be followed eventually by Sweden. Additionally, Ukraine will have made significant strides in solidifying its official relationship with NATO, a course of action that cannot be reversed.?

?

In practical terms, this signifies the invalidation of the ultimatum Vladimir Putin had directed at NATO, following which he decided to wage in February 2022, implicating Russia in a its current quagmire. Some argue that it was the West, particularly the United States, which lured Vladimir Putin to the war through provocation. To a large extent, this assertion holds true, as late US President Ronald Reagan had assured Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO's membership would not expand, in exchange for Gorbachev's consent to dissolve the Warsaw Pact and the Eastern Bloc. Nevertheless, these commitments were verbal rather than written guarantees.?

?

Vladimir Putin's aim was to exact revenge for the deceptive promises and historical sins; however, in doing so, he made a grave historical blunder himself. His actions expedited the expansion of NATO, and he inadvertently paved the way for Ukraine's official integration into the alliance, right within Russia's backyard. This outcome resulted from a war that Putin still refuses to acknowledge explicitly, still referring to it as a "special military operation."?

?

What actions will the Russian president take vis-à-vis the impending decisions of the NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, which will cement Ukraine's deeper integration into the alliance? Will he heed the call of the Russian military, which insists that he must make a political decision and grant them the green light for widescale military operations involving ruthless tactics, including the targeting of civilians and the comprehensive destruction of cities, as demanded by the nature of contemporary warfare? How will Putin address the predicament in which the military institution claims Russia has found itself? Will he accept a significant defeat for Russia or radically alter the military equation by adopting what they refer to as the American model in Iraq, namely, a strategy of total annihilation with little regard for the scale and consequences of civilian casualties??

?

The answer is complicated. Yevgeny Prigozhin’s mutiny served to highlight the public frustration with Russia's performance in its "special military operation" in Ukraine. Prigozhin is not an agent of the United States, but a loyal operative of Russia and its leadership. It is not true that he attempted a military coup to overthrow President Putin; his goal was to compel the Russian presidency to reconsider its military decisions in the Ukrainian war and to push for the removal of the Russian Defence Minister and the commander of Russian forces in Ukraine. His rebellion unveiled the prevailing mood within Russian society, and this is the most dangerous aspect.?

?

Next week will mark 500 days since the start of the Russian war in Ukraine, with military losses surpassing those of the Soviet Union in the Afghan war. The Russian people have become restless and are astonished by how the Russian army, one of the largest in the world, has become incapacitated, disorganized, and is facing a humiliating defeat. This is a nation caught off guard by a war that was not anticipated, a war that exposed structural weaknesses within its governing system and military institution. While they are on the verge of outrage, they are not intent yet on overthrowing their president. What they want is a change in the military leadership and a different approach to conducting the special military operation.?

?

There will be consequences of the Wagner Group's withdrawal from the battlefield in Ukraine, as they were the fiercest fighters – they lost over 20,000 fighters since the war began, with 13,000 casualties in the battle of Bakhmut alone. Prigozhin was at the forefront of the military personnel who demanded that the military institution and the Russian president remove their white gloves and engage in what they call a real war. The fundamental question now is: Will Putin do it, or will he continue to be afraid of the consequences??

?

Vladimir Putin played a game of chicken with the West, on the assumption that the latter would not dare to ignore his infamous ultimatum and would acquiesce to his conditions. However, the opposite occurred. The West disregarded Putin's warning and treated it with contempt. This infuriated Putin, leading him to make the error of falling into a trap that was set for him and one he set for himself.?

?

The West is currently betting on Putin's unwillingness to use the nuclear option and on his hesitation to be as ruthless as the war requires in order to avoid defeat. When Wagner was sill on the scene, they could hide their losses and atrocities, hiding behind their nature as an irregular force rather than a state army. But the Russian army cannot hide or disappear to if it wants to liberate or occupy a city especially since liberation or occupation requires brutality and savagery under the watchful eyes of the world.?

?

Vladimir Putin realizes that the United States and all NATO member states will be on his heels if he takes the advice of the military and issues orders for a crushing victory regardless of the human cost. He realizes that victory requires the destruction of entire cities and the killing of tens of thousands of civilians. He realizes, but he fears. He understands the cost of avoiding defeat and fears the price of victory.?

?

In their warning to the Russian president, the Americans have vowed to take measures to sever Russia’s communications and place it under a suffocating isolation if Vladimir Putin chooses to discard the ‘white gloves’ as the military leadership desires. The message from the Americans is clear: if you destroy cities, we will impose a deadly siege and cut off your internet and mobile phone services—a siege that every Russian citizen will feel. This is in addition to measures that will paralyze financial transactions, and imports and exports.?

?

The equation is exceedingly difficult for Vladimir Putin. If he wants victory in the Ukrainian war, he must give the green light to the Russian army. However, by granting a green light to avoid defeat at any cost, he would be risking turning Russia into a rogue, besieged, and isolated nation. What does the Russian people want Vladimir Putin to do? Perhaps the president knows, but he fears acknowledging what he dreads: the other undesirable option admitting to his historical blunder and making painful concessions to Ukraine, and accepting NATO's expanded membership, which can now strategically encircle Russia without facing retaliation. This alternative, the alternative of "count your losses," i.e., withdrawal, before incurring further losses, is almost inconceivable.?

?

Realistically, the prospect of diplomatic negotiations to end the Russian-Ukrainian war has become untenable, as Russia's terms have become outdated - the prevention of NATO expansion and Ukraine from aligning with this alliance. Moreover, the Russian military does not want the political establishment to engage in a negotiation process along the lines of the "Minsk" formula. The military is adamant about securing a military victory prior to any negotiations, insisting on a negotiation framework that upholds Russian superiority. The military refuses to read the writing on the wall, which suggests that the Ukrainian war is leading to the imminent collapse of the Russian empire. Its view is that rescuing Russia from impending ruin is only achievable by prevailing in the Ukrainian conflict.?

?

Not long ago, the Russian people enjoyed a sense of security and relished freedoms that had been withheld from them under the Soviet regime. They could travel and enjoy a life of relative wellbeing. A kind of social contract existed between the people and Vladimir Putin, despite their discontent with his dictatorial inclinations, in exchange for economic prosperity and the opportunity to engage with the world. Today, however, this social contract has suffered a rupture, and Russian society now demands corrective measures.?

?

When the mutiny of the Wagner chief started, the US administration interpreted the situation as an attempted coup and a project of sowing chaos in a nuclear armed nation. The administration had serious concerns about this mix of instability, nuclear power, and chaos. The continued presence of President Vladimir Putin in power seemed to be a safeguard, not only in the eyes of certain Americans but also from the perspective of many who observed the developments of the past week with profound astonishment. Indeed, they considered the outbreak of chaos in Russia to be a more detrimental outcome than Putin remaining in power.?

?

Ultimately, the events of last week indicate that Russia will never return to the status quo ante, prior to the Ukrainian war. Vladimir Putin did not derive any advantages from these developments or from the disintegration of Russia's institutional and social foundations. We are therefore at the beginning of seeing the consequences of these events, and it is premature to assert that instability has spared Russia. As long as the Russian war in Ukraine persists, Putin will find himself in a predicament, Russia will remain in a precarious situation, and the Russian empire will inexorably slip towards an uncertain destiny.?