By Eric Vandenbroeck and co-workers

Why It  Is Time To Prepare For Russia’s Collapse

Since Russia’s attempt to take Kyiv and install a puppet government failed in the early days of the war, a defeat for the Kremlin in Ukraine has looked increasingly likely. What’s stunning after almost a year of the war, therefore, is the near-total absence of any discussion among politicians, policymakers, analysts, and journalists of the consequences of defeat for Russia. It is a dangerous lack of imagination, considering the potential for Russia’s collapse and disintegration.

The combination of a failed war abroad and a brittle, strained system at home increases the likelihood of some implosion with every passing day. Whether this will be good or bad for the West, it’s an outcome for which policymakers should prepare.

 

There Are Various Scenarios For What Might Happen In Russia.

There are various scenarios for what might happen in Russia after the defeat in Ukraine becoming even more apparent. Most likely is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s departure from office, followed by a vicious power struggle 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. We don’t know who has a stake in the system and a resurgent semi-democratic movement committed to ending the war and improving Russia. We don’t know who will win, but we can confidently predict that the power struggle will weaken the regime and distract Russia from what remains of its war effort. In turn, a weakened regime, in conjunction with a malfunctioning economy, will invite disgruntled Russians to take to the streets, perhaps even with arms, and encourage some of the non-Russian political units comprising the Russian Federation to opt for greater self-rule; leading candidates include Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Chechnya, Dagestan, and Sakha. If Russia survives this turmoil, it’s likely to become a weak client state of China. If it does not, the map of Eurasia could look very different.

Given Russia’s vast expanse, long history of restive regions, and large non-Russian ethnicities—all a result of centuries of imperial conquest—the one scenario that deserves much more attention is a disintegration of centralized control and breakup of the federation. There is a rich history of state collapse following wars, revolutions, system breakdowns, economic crises, and other epochal events. Napoleon’s empire collapsed after his disastrous march on Moscow and subsequent defeat at the Battle of Leipzig. In 1918, the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, German, and Russian empires collapsed in military defeat. Of course, people, decisions, and policies played a role. Still, ultimately it was war and the attendant economic and social crises that pushed these states over the edge into political chaos and often violence.

Consider, as well, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, an outcome very few Russians wanted or even imagined when Mikhail Gorbachev took power as Soviet Communist Party leader in 1985. As late as early 1991, most Soviet citizens voted in a referendum to retain their country. True, all the republics, including Russia, declared sovereignty in 1990, and all, save Russia, declared full independence in the aftermath of the failed hard-liner coup in 1991. But the system collapsed primarily because Gorbachev decided to rejuvenate the Soviet Union by dismantling its core features, totalitarianism, and central planning, thereby setting political, social, and economic forces in motion that ultimately compelled most of the republics to seek refuge from the chaos in autonomy and independence. Perestroika—Gorbachev’s signature economic and political restructuring policy—unintentionally killed the Soviet Union.                            

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev as president of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the start of the USSR’s collapse—but not the collapse itself. While the USSR ceased to exist as a legal entity after 1991, the collapse of the USSR is still happening today. The two Chechen Wars, Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, the on-and-off border skirmishes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, and the 2020 Second Karabakh War between Armenia and Azerbaijan are just a few examples showing that the Soviet Union is still collapsing today. 

However, future historians will likely describe Russia's February 2022 invasion of Ukraine as the most consequential moment, if not the final moment, of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When the war in Ukraine ends is unknown, but it will likely mark the dissolution of the Russian Federation (the legal successor of the Soviet Union) as it is known today. Russia has undeniably suffered a major blow to its economy, devastation to its military capability, and degradation of its influence in regions where it once had clout. The borders of the Russian Federation will likely not look the same on a map in 10 or 20 years as they do now. As the final collapse of the Soviet Union plays out and as the Russian Federation faces the possibility of dissolving, policymakers need to start planning for the new geopolitical reality on the Eurasian landmass.

The combination of a failed war abroad and a brittle, strained system at home increases the likelihood of implosion with every passing day. Whether this will be good or bad for the West, it’s an outcome for which policymakers should prepare.

Various scenarios for what might happen in Russia after the defeat in Ukraine become even more apparent. Most likely is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s departure from office, followed by a vicious power struggle 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. We don’t know who will win, but we can confidently predict that the power struggle will weaken the regime and distract Russia from what remains of its war effort. In turn, a weakened regime, in conjunction with a malfunctioning economy, will invite disgruntled Russians to take to the streets, perhaps even with arms, and encourage some of the non-Russian political units comprising the Russian Federation to opt for greater self-rule; leading candidates include Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Chechnya, Dagestan, and Sakha. If Russia survives this turmoil, it’s likely to become a weak client state of China. If it does not, the map of Eurasia could look very different.

Given Russia’s vast expanse, long history of restive regions, and large non-Russian ethnicities—all a result of centuries of imperial conquest—the one scenario that deserves much more attention is a disintegration of centralized control and breakup of the federation. There is a rich history of state collapse following wars, revolutions, system breakdowns, economic crises, and other epochal events. Napoleon’s empire collapsed after his disastrous march on Moscow and subsequent defeat at the Battle of Leipzig. In 1918, the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, German, and Russian empires collapsed in military defeat. Of course, people, decisions, and policies played a role. Still, ultimately it was war and the attendant economic and social crises that pushed these states over the edge into political chaos and often violence.

Consider, as well, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, an outcome very few Russians wanted or even imagined when Mikhail Gorbachev took power as Soviet Communist Party leader in 1985. As late as early 1991, most Soviet citizens voted in a referendum to retain their country. True, all the republics, including Russia, declared sovereignty in 1990, and all, save Russia, declared full independence in the aftermath of the failed hard-liner coup in 1991. But the system collapsed primarily because Gorbachev decided to rejuvenate the Soviet Union by dismantling its core features, totalitarianism, and central planning, thereby setting political, social, and economic forces in motion that ultimately compelled most of the republics to seek refuge from the chaos in autonomy and independence. Perestroika—Gorbachev’s signature economic and political restructuring policy—unintentionally killed the Soviet Union.

If today’s Russia follows these countries’ footsteps into collapse, it will have little to do with the Russian elite’s will or Western policies. More considerable structural forces are at work. Putin’s Russia suffers from a slew of mutually reinforcing tensions that have produced a far more fragile state than his braggadocio would suggest. They include military, moral, and economic defeat in the Ukraine war—but also the brittleness and ineffectiveness of Putin’s hyper-centralized political system; the collapse of his macho personality cult as he faces defeat, illness, and visible age; the gross mismanagement of Russia’s petrostate economy; the untrammeled corruption that penetrates all levels of society; and the vast ethnic and regional cleavages in the world’s last unreconstructed empire. Even though few may want Russia’s dissolution today, it’s not too difficult to imagine a scenario where growing political, economic, and social instability will, at some point, compel Russia’s constituent units to seek safety in independence.

When Ukrainian intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov celebrated his birthday earlier this week with a birthday cake showing Russia sliced into several pieces, it was an epic act of trolling. But the idea behind the image on the icing doesn’t seem all that far-fetched.

Under today’s conditions, it may only take a trigger to push the system toward collapse. The failed war with Ukraine, which has revealed the weakness of Putin and his state, could very well be the spark that ignites the frayed timbers of Russia’s institutions. Of course, sparks are unpredictable, and Russia could weather the current crisis and survive in its present form, whether under Putin or a successor. But even if it does, it will be severely weakened as a state, and all the structural tensions will remain. Putin may even suspect this. In his 2023 New Year’s address, he invoked the war’s potential threat to Russia’s independence—something he has not said before.

But if the spark does come, would a likely Russian collapse be destabilizing and violent, perhaps including civil war? Historian Marlene Laruelle, the director of the Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian studies at George Washington University, thinks so. “A collapse would generate several civil wars,” she said, as “new statelets would fight with one another over borders and economic assets.” Meanwhile, Moscow elites “would react with violence to any secessionism.”

The success of Ukraine on the battlefield against Russia could offer a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to put Russia back inside its geopolitical box for a generation. This would create a new geopolitical reality not seen in a generation. As policymakers plan for this new geopolitical reality, they should learn the lessons from the 1990s when Western decision-makers naively hoped for democratic governance and economic reforms in Russia that never materialized. If Moscow’s behavior on the world stage since 1991 has shown anything, it is that Russia is unlikely to become a responsible global actor in the foreseeable future. Instead of focusing on the unachievable, American decision-makers should pursue pragmatic and realistic policies that advance the national interest of the US.

 

Pressure Also Grows On Putin, Similar To The Nuremberg Trials Of Nazi War Criminals.

Pressure also grows on Putin as politicians and lawyers point to principles that led to the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals.

While the International Criminal Court (ICC) is already looking at allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity about the Ukraine invasion, advocates for a special tribunal say it is needed because the ICC does not have the power to examine the crime of aggression. The United Nations defines an act of aggression as the “invasion or attack by the armed forces of a state on the territory of another state or any military occupation”.

Its advocates say a special tribunal would heap further pressure on Russia and Putin. It would stop senior Russian officials from traveling out of fear of arrest, show solidarity with Ukraine, which has requested the tribunal, and send a message from the international community that aggression will not go unpunished. It would also examine Belarus’s role.

“It has been 10 months since Russia, backed by Belarus, launched one of the largest ground invasions in Europe since the second world war,” they write. “Since then, thousands of Ukrainian civilians have been killed or injured, 8 million people have been internally displaced and around 8 million have become refugees. Civilian infrastructure and economic assets worth tens of billions have been destroyed or plundered, and irreplaceable cultural monuments have been reduced to rubble.

“If proven in court, these acts of aggression could constitute what the Nuremberg trials termed the ‘supreme international crime’. For it is a crime of aggression from which most other international crimes – war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide – often flow.”

 

Calls For A Special Tribunal Are Intended To Show Vladimir Putin That He Will Be Held To Account For His Actions In Ukraine.

The statement was drawn up by former prime minister Gordon Brown and Philippe Sands, a law professor who was the first to raise the idea of a special tribunal. Others who signed the statement included human rights barristers Cherie Blair and Helena Kennedy.

The Netherlands had said earlier that it would host such a tribunal backed by the UN. The European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has also noted that a new tribunal with broad support was needed to ensure Russia’s invasion did not go unpunished. A Ukrainian delegation traveled to the US last month to gain support for the move.

A UK government spokesperson said: “There is growing evidence that appalling atrocities have been committed during Russia’s illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine. We have been actively supporting Ukraine’s own domestic judicial system, investigations and prosecutions, and the ICC's investigation. We are, of course, carefully considering other proposals for mechanisms to hold Russia to account.”

The move came as Russia launched attacks across Ukraine on Saturday, despite declaring a unilateral ceasefire for the Orthodox celebration of Christmas. One attack killed a civilian couple in their 60s in eastern Bakhmut.

 

 

For updates click hompage here