Putinism and the War Against Ukraine
Historian Michael Kimmage argues that Putinism has cornered Russian President Vladimir Putin and the country itself into a dead end because of the war in Ukraine, which is draining the nation with no exit strategy. In an article published in The New York Times, Kimmage notes that the full-scale invasion has now lasted over four years, and during this time Putinism has reached an eerie equilibrium that is, in reality, a trap for everyone involved.
Putin funds the war through large cash payments to recruits, yet forced mobilization remains deeply unpopular among the population. Despite this, the Kremlin maintains control within the country, and Russia is not isolated. Most Russians work for the state but have no influence over its governance.
“Waging a war and winning it are not the same thing”
Michael Kimmage
Kimmage emphasizes that if Putin has no way out of the war, ordinary Russians currently have no way out of Putinism. He also highlights the risks tied to nuclear weapons, which could provoke a strong response from the United States and Europe or a break with China. Should the conflict be settled along the current front line, Russia would gain only a narrow strip of territory in southern Ukraine.
Discontent among the population is real, but its essence lies in the feeling that Putinism, despite all its failures, appears endless. Kimmage also notes that “Putin is an unmatched authoritarian ruler, but a mediocre head of state and a poor economic manager.” He believes that the path to competent Russian leadership requires the dismantling of Putinism, and Putin’s departure could shatter the stability he has tried to impose.
The Complexity of Russia’s Situation
As a result, the situation in Russia remains extremely complex, and future developments raise serious questions about the country’s trajectory.
Kimmage’s conclusions underscore that Russia’s current predicament stems not only from military actions but also from domestic policies that stifle potential reforms and changes. Amid high mobilization and a lack of dialogue with the public, the country could find itself on the brink of social and economic crises, which in turn could pose new challenges for Putin’s regime.
The importance of international relations, particularly in the context of nuclear threats, further complicates any assessment of how events in the region may unfold.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has pushed Putin to adopt increasingly desperate measures, as seen in his recent shift towards a performance of self-defense driven by humiliation. This response not only highlights the precariousness of his regime but also reflects the broader implications of Putinism's grip on Russia, complicating any potential resolution to the war.