Short-lived mutiny in Russia sheds light on Putin’s grip on power

For more than a year, US officials have been quietly asking themselves a question they wouldn’t dare ask publicly: Could Russia’s failed invasion of Ukraine eventually lead to the fall of President Vladimir V. Putin?

For a few chaotic, giddy hours this weekend, the idea didn’t seem so far-fetched. But even with the apparent end of the immediate threat posed by Yevgeny Prigozhin’s mercenary insurgent army, the short-lived uprising suggested that Putin’s grip on power is weaker than at any time since taking office more than two decades ago.

The aftermath of the mutiny presents President Biden and US policymakers with both opportunities and dangers in what is perhaps the most volatile moment since the early days of the invasion of Ukraine. Desperation in Russia could lead to a collapse in the war effort as Ukrainian troops mount their long-awaited counter-offensive, but officials in Washington remained nervous about an unpredictable, nuclear-armed Mr. Putin feeling vulnerable.

“It’s beneficial to the US because it distracts the Russians and this will weaken their military effort in Ukraine and make them less likely to continue to create new problems in places like Syria,” said Evelyn N. Farkas, executive director of the McCain Institute. for International Leadership and a former Pentagon official. “The most important thing we care about is ensuring that professional military personnel maintain control of all nuclear facilities.”

The armed confrontation on the way to Moscow, however brief, represented the most dramatic struggle for power in Russia since the failed coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991 and the confrontation between Boris Yeltsin and parliament in 1993. Unlike those episodes, Washington had however, not a favorite in battle. Mr Prigozhin is no more a friend of the United States than Mr Putin.

Mr Biden responded to the crisis by not reacting and opting for caution rather than speaking out, which would risk putting Putin ammunition for claiming that this was all a foreign conspiracy, which is often the first line is in the Kremlin playbook when domestic problems arise. . Mr Biden postponed his departure to Camp David to conduct a secure video briefing with top advisers in the White House Ward Room – a makeshift Situation Room while the real one is being renovated – and also spoke to Britain’s leaders, France and Germany.

Jake Sullivan, the president’s national security adviser, canceled a trip to Denmark intended to drum up support for Ukraine so he could accompany him Mr. Biden to Camp David and held the scheduled meeting by video instead. General Mark A. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also canceled visits to Israel and Jordan. But beyond reiterating US support for Ukraine, the government remained silent, letting events play out as officials scrutinized intelligence to understand what was happening.

The government has long prepared contingency plans for such a scenario, but had to scramble like everyone else on Saturday to get hard information from Russia and interpret what it meant, relying on social media and other online sources as much as traditional intelligence tools.

US officials paid special attention to Russia’s nuclear arsenal, nervous about the instability in a country that has the power to wipe out most of the planet. But a senior administration official said the government found no change in the disposition of Russian weapons, nor did it see America’s nuclear stance change.

“It’s moving pretty fast, so it’s hard to know where we’ll end up, but the two big issues for the US are command and control of the nuclear weapons and the implications for Ukrainian efforts to liberate more territory,” he said. James Goldgeier. , professor of international relations at American University and specialist in Russia.

Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a longtime Russia intelligence analyst who now works at the Center for a New American Security, said the United States has limited capacity to influence events there and should focus on preventing spillover violence and disorder.

“Washington must avoid fueling deep-rooted paranoia in Russia that the US or NATO will try to exploit the chaos,” she said. “That will be important to avoid an overreaction in Moscow and in the long run when a time comes to stabilize relations with a future Russia.”

However they took it, US officials viewed the events on the ground as evidence of Mr Putin’s eroding position. For months they have followed Mr Prigozhin’s escalating feud with the Ministry of Defense leadership over the management of the war in Ukraine, wondering like others why Mr Putin tolerated such open dissent and speculating whether the Russian president secretly encouraged it. for its own political purposes.

But by Saturday, there was little doubt in the White House and national security agencies that Mr. Prigozhin had wreaked havoc on Mr. Putin. Once a senior lieutenant of the Russian president who orchestrated interference in the 2016 US election, Mr Prigozhin publicly debunked Mr Putin’s entire rationale for the war and refuted the idea that the invasion was a justified response to alleged threats to Russia by Ukraine and NATO.

Furthermore, in his address to the nation as the crisis unfolded on Saturday, Mr. Putin compared the situation to 1917, when the last tsarist government collapsed in the midst of a war going badly, a comparison that only fueled the image of a Kremlin leader losing his grip on the land. And by making a deal with Mr Prigozhin just hours after threatening to crush him, Mr Putin confirmed the reality that he no longer has exclusive control over the use of force on Russian soil.

“One thing is very clear: Putin looks very weak,” said Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington. But a collapse of Putin’s government, she added, would bring its own dangers. The United States and its allies “should focus on supporting Ukraine as they plan all possible scenarios, including a fall of the Putin regime and its replacement with a hard-right faction that will be bolder and less restrained when it comes to for the war in Ukraine. .”

Even assuming he stays in power, policymakers worry that Putin could become more erratic if he feels cornered. “Weakness leads to riskier behavior on the part of Putin,” said Jon Huntsman Jr., a former ambassador to Russia under President Donald J. Trump. “There is a new ripple in Putin’s ‘invincibility’ that will be exploited from every angle.”

For Ukraine, which is working with US arms suppliers and intelligence officials to drive invaders from its territory, Russia’s internal strife provided a welcome balm after the long-awaited counter-offensive got off to a slow start.

The Wagner Group’s mercenary organization led by Mr. Prigozhin was seen as the most effective Russian force on the battlefield, but with its charismatic leader headed for apparent exile in Belarus and its troops absorbed by the Russian Department of Defense, it may no longer be so. the ferocious combat unit it has been.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, the Prigozhin Rebellion ended before major Russian troops were removed from the front lines to protect Moscow, according to US intelligence. But US officials expect the disagreement to fuel doubts already plaguing Russian troops about the usefulness of the war and the ability of their leadership. And few believe that Mr. Prigozhin is an exhausted force who just goes back to selling hot dogs, as he did as a young man. US officials expect he still has cards to play.

Indeed, Kurt D. Volker, former ambassador to NATO and special envoy to Ukraine, said the Prigozhin uprising marks the beginning of the end of the war and Mr. Putin’s term in office, even with the deal closing the march on Moscow shortened.

“Don’t trust the reversal,” he said. “This is positioning. Prigozhin wants to be seen as a hero to the Russians as he seeks more support and demands. The state will go after him and that may be his excuse to defend himself ‘reluctantly’.”

As Mr. Volker put it, there will be “many more shoes to drop”.