Losing and changing: three options for Russia's future

Russia is no longer a member of the "adult" club. An unprovoked barbaric war of aggression has crossed it off the list, as well as propaganda, troll factories, war crimes and open energy and nuclear blackmail. The real "mystery of the Russian soul" has terrified the world and its leaders, forcing them to look for a new security formula. What scenario of Russia's future should it take into account?

The only way to sustainable peace in Europe is Russia's military defeat, Western experts agreed during a discussion at the Chatham House think tank in London. Delaying military action or making concessions to Putin as part of the so-called "peace talks" will only mean a new big war with the Kremlin in the long run.

Putin's propaganda machine is trying to intimidate democratic societies with the migration crisis, lack of nuclear arms control, polarization of the world and the growing sphere of autocracies influence. Admittedly, all these consequences are possible, but they should not be paralyzing. The inertial development of events is many times more catastrophic, and therefore scenarios of Russia's transformation can and should be discussed. Moreover, "considering the potential for Russia’s collapse and disintegration, the West simply must be prepared for it," Alexander J. Motyl, a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark, emphasizes in an article for Foreign Policy.

Observers at the American Hudson Institute, meanwhile, analyze possible scenarios: will national minorities try to free themselves from the Kremlin's tyranny, following the example of the former Soviet republics? How will the confrontation between private armies develop? What will Russia look like if it maintains its current borders?

The first scenario: totalitarianism

"This scenario is already underway now," says Anna Caprile, policy analyst at the European Parliament's Research Service, in her report. "According to it, the regime of the Russian President Vladimir Putin evolves into a ‘boosted’ version of itself, towards an increasingly entrenched over-authoritarian, over-centralised, semi-totalitarian regime."

Repressions will become more brutal and the power vertical more authoritarian. The likely introduction of martial law will remove the last formal safeguards for federal and regional authorities. The requirements of martial law would be used to justify any actions and restrictions.

Against the backdrop of new waves of mobilization, losses, and economic downturn, ideological indoctrination programs, especially addressed to young people, will expand dramatically. "Russian think-tanks have already anticipated a blueprint with different development models for this scenario, under self-explanatory titles: the most promising, according to the authors, appears to be ‘USSR 2.0’; the most controversial, ‘Nation Z’," Caprile writes.

Paradoxically, some researchers believe that the formula of poverty, war and propaganda can stabilize Russia on the principle of Iran, because "The Russian people are ready to tolerate poverty for the sake of goals imposed by propaganda," analysts say, "Meanwhile, it will never be possible to completely block the flow of money into the military’s budget, that is, the regime can finance war almost endlessly."

According to another version, the strengthening of the already over-centralized and supra-authoritarian regime could lead to collapse.

The second scenario: a war of private armies

On May 9, on Red Square, Putin once again ignored historical facts and tried to attribute a sole victory and military exploits in WWII to the Russians.

Instead, the man who demonstrates in practice, not in words, how Russians wage war, the head of the private military campaign Wagner, Yevgeny Prigozhin, was not among the invitees.

Putin’s chef, a prisoner recruiter and admirer of brutal murders recorded on video, delivered an alternative "victory" speech about "clowns in the mausoleum." The speech was perceived as a challenge to the Kremlin and the beginning of an era of influence by private army owners.

Putin is likely to try to retain power at any cost. Against the backdrop of global isolation and the lack of quick military victories, irritation with the dictator will grow. The need to replace him will become obvious.

However, whether Vladimir Putin stays in power or is replaced by a new face does not matter, says Keir Giles, one of the leading British security experts who specializes in Russia's armed forces and defense capabilities. After all, Russia is not a product of Putin, but rather a product of Russian political culture.

Influence groups will fight each other with the help of private armies.

"A vicious power struggle will begin among the extreme right-wing nationalists who want to continue the war effort and destroy the existing political hierarchy, authoritarian conservatives who have a stake in the system, and a resurgent semi-democratic movement committed to ending the war and reforming Russia," writes Alexander Motyl, a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark, in an article for Foreign Policy 

The third scenario: disintegration

According to Luke Coffey in his article for the Hudson Institute think tank, the Kremlin will not be able to keep the state, consisting of 83 federal subjects, within its current borders. Indeed, calls for secession from Russia are already being heard in some regions.

Anti-Kremlin sentiments may intensify with the return - dead or alive - of military personnel selected and sent to war on ethnic grounds. Another factor in the likely split of Russia is the growing radicalization of extreme right-wing movements.

"A state with more than 150 ethnic groups has a great potential for partial fragmentation, although I don't think it will happen on the basis of orderly negotiations between the subjects of the Russian Federation, rather it will simply disintegrate in a power vacuum," said analyst Anna Caprile.

The fall of the Soviet Union came as a shock to many Western analysts, and some Western leaders even tried to prevent this process, historians recall. But they advise not to repeat past mistakes when the West invested energy and resources in trying to democratize Russia.

Coffey, an expert on Europe and Eurasia, suggests that we should simply recognize that the West is not capable of democratizing Russia. "Whoever replaces Putin will not be Thomas Jefferson," Coffey says. The next leader, in his opinion, will be "just as nationalistic and authoritarian" and "Western policymakers should stop hoping for a 'moderate' Russian leader who wants peace with his neighbors and reforms at home."

Perhaps it is time for the "adults" who remain in the club to accept reality and take care of mitigating the negative phenomena that the collapse of Russia will lead to:

• take control of weapons of mass destruction,
• provide the countries bordering Russia with the ability to defend themselves,
• develop tools for the rapid expansion of NATO and the European Union,
• balance the growing roles of China and Turkey in Eurasia, the Middle East and Africa.