Putinism and Soviet Power

My silence over the last couple weeks is a reflection of the fact that, on the one hand my efforts have all been on chasing news about Ukraine, and on the other, that I have little new to offer beyond what can be found on Radio Free Europe, BBC World news, and the Times. But yesterday I was asked about the relationship between Putinism and the Soviet Union, and here I have some opinions that are perhaps worth sharing.

The question was prompted by as much by Putin’s attempt to create a Eurasion Union to counter the European Union as by the Russian invasion of the Crimea. Ukraine would have been a key partner in that Union (it already includes Kazakhstan and Belarus), and it was Putin’s fear of Ukraine joining the EU instead that prompted Russia to meddle in Ukraine back in November, helping to start EuroMaidan. Russia’s present belligerence in Ukraine is a desperate attempt at creating through force what could not be gained by economic and political bullying.

Whatever the results in Ukraine, there will be no new Soviet Union. The USSR justified its existence to its own people on the basis of ideology. While that ideology was badly corrupted and widely discredited by the last decades of Soviet power, it nevertheless continued to provide shape to government policy at home and abroad.

Putinism has no ideology. Its sole reason for existing is power, and it justifies itself to Russians in narrow terms of economics and national security. For this reason, Ukraine is both essential to Putin, and a major danger to his power.

Economically Putin’s Crimean adventure has already produced significant costs. The ruble is in free fall and the Russian stock exchange is crashing. Any hope of economic cooperation with Ukraine based on rational mutual interests is gone, and with it so is the vision of a meaningful Eurasion Union. Ukraine – or at least that part of it not annexed by Russia – is almost certain to now turn decisively westward.

Which brings us to the question of national security. In the short term Putin may claim a victory in Crimea. But in the long term Putinist adventurism can only lead to danger for Russia. It is already leading to calls for a stronger NATO presence in Poland, and even discussion of reviving American National Missile Defense stations. In Crimea, nationalist Russian rule is noxious to the Islamic Crimean Tatar population, who may not sit quietly by.

Ukraine may lose Crimea in the coming days, but in the coming years Russia is liable to be the big loser.