Analysis: Putin's disappearance, a strategic diversion?
Mar 17, 2015 15:21:37 GMT -5
Post by J.J.Gibbs on Mar 17, 2015 15:21:37 GMT -5
Analysis: Putin's disappearance, a strategic diversion?
Was it meant to divert attention from Nemtsov murder and boost Putin ratings on Crimea takeover anniversary?
After March 5, when Russian President Vladimir Putin disappeared, the Russian media and the blogosphere dealt with little else, relegating questions about the murder of opposition leader Boris Nemtsov to the back burner.
The rumor mill generated conflicting versions of events:
Putin was arrested and held by a group of mysterious coup plotters, who also moved against Chechen strongman Ramzan Kadyrov, who is allegedly behind Nemtsov's murder.
Putin was sick or had a botched face-lift.
Putin went to Switzerland to be at the bedside of his alleged girlfriend, Olympic gymnast Alina Kabaeva, who was giving birth to their son.
Be that as it may, the main "Putin event" was not the surfacing of the Russian president at a meeting with the President of Kyrgyzstan on Monday, but the a two-plus hour documentary on the first anniversary of the annexation of Crimea, aired on Russian state TV Channel 1.
It could be that Putin’s disappearance diverted attention from the Nemtsov murder to the main hero of the documentary himself in order to boost the Russian president's popularity.
In the documentary, Putin accuses the United States of staging the Maidan revolution in Ukraine, and takes credit for a major, bloodless victory in Crimea, which he says "benefited" Russia and the people of Crimea. The ensuing bloody fighting in Eastern Ukraine is barely mentioned.
Sergeo Karpukhin (Pool/AFP/File)
The documentary suggests several things.
First, Putin publicly announces that he ordered Russian security chiefs to "take steps" to annex Crimea on the night of February 22-23, 2014, when it became clear that (former) Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovich may be swept from power.
Putin admits that he ordered Russian special forces to prepare for the takeover of the strategic peninsula for executive "reunification." The Russian military, which had plans for this takeover for at least ten years prior to the actual event, exercised every manner of stealth insertion into the region.
The justification for the takeover, as stated in the film: protection of the Russian majority on the peninsula. Yet such clusters of Russians reside in Estonia, Latvia and Kazakhstan. It is possible that these countries may be next in line. Putin ignores the fact that Crimea is the territory of a sovereign neighboring state, and that its takeover is an act of aggression by any definition of international law.
He further ignores history: Crimea today has a Russian majority only because Joseph Stalin ethnically cleansed the Crimean Tatars from their ancestral homeland in 1944. The Soviets then prevented the Crimean Tatars from returning to their homeland. The Tatars’ representative assembly – the Majlis – desperately tried to stop the March 2014 referendum.
Putin does not consider his actions an aggression, appearing relaxed and downplaying Western punitive sanctions.
Putin claims he moved against the Crimea based on secretly ordered and clandestinely executed public opinion polls. He talks about ordering opinion polls inside Russia before bringing the annexation/"reunification" for a vote in the Russian parliament.
Given Putin’s control of national television and an incessant stream of propaganda about "Ukrainian Nazis" and their plans to "kill" Russian speakers in Crimea, it is not surprising that public opinion favored annexation.
Putin visibly enjoys talking about his direct command of Operation Crimea.
In the film, he does not give credit to any of his fellow leaders, and mildly rebukes Minister of Defense Sergey Shoigu. Indeed, this was a complex feat of covert action, politics and military power projections, which involved Russian special forces, the Russian Black Sea Fleet, air force, Strategic Rocket Forces (which Putin put on alert for the first time since the end of the Cold War). Putin also took the lead, he said, in legal, domestic political and foreign policy realms.
Importantly, the film also makes clear Putin’s comfortable use of violent "informal structures." For example, the film highlights the use of The Night Wolves, a violent ultra-nationalist bikers gang, as essentially a special forces unit serving the Kremlin. The biker gang is lead by Alexander Zaldonstanov, nickmed Khirurg (the Surgeon) – for his propensity to cut people up.
This is a political style known in czarist Russia since the Black Hundreds, the ultra-nationalists who used to kill and rob the Jews. This also happened under Vladimir Lenin, the father of the Soviet state, who found and used a Georgian bank robber named Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin).
The use of massive off-the-books violence is of particular concern, especially when these organizations are used by a nuclear superpower headed by a secret police operative. This should be kept in mind amid growing reports of Russian support for European extreme left and extreme right groups.
The film is a warning to Ukraine, to other countries of the former USSR and to the West: Putin doesn’t regret anything.
He prefers to have his victories bloodless if he can – he has read Sun Tsu, the Chinese military theorist of 2,300 years ago, who teaches that the highest order of victory is when the enemy surrenders without a fight – and this was demonstrated in Ukraine.
However, Putin stresses that his military is now confident in its operational capability and in its Supreme Commander, and he admits, in a déjà vu of the Cold War, that he put the Strategic Nuclear Forces of Russia on high alert – to send a message to the West.
The Crimean operation was an opening act of a new confrontation between Russia and the West. The new Putin documentary demonstrated clearly the scope of the threat faced by the West.
link
Was it meant to divert attention from Nemtsov murder and boost Putin ratings on Crimea takeover anniversary?
After March 5, when Russian President Vladimir Putin disappeared, the Russian media and the blogosphere dealt with little else, relegating questions about the murder of opposition leader Boris Nemtsov to the back burner.
The rumor mill generated conflicting versions of events:
Putin was arrested and held by a group of mysterious coup plotters, who also moved against Chechen strongman Ramzan Kadyrov, who is allegedly behind Nemtsov's murder.
Putin was sick or had a botched face-lift.
Putin went to Switzerland to be at the bedside of his alleged girlfriend, Olympic gymnast Alina Kabaeva, who was giving birth to their son.
Be that as it may, the main "Putin event" was not the surfacing of the Russian president at a meeting with the President of Kyrgyzstan on Monday, but the a two-plus hour documentary on the first anniversary of the annexation of Crimea, aired on Russian state TV Channel 1.
It could be that Putin’s disappearance diverted attention from the Nemtsov murder to the main hero of the documentary himself in order to boost the Russian president's popularity.
In the documentary, Putin accuses the United States of staging the Maidan revolution in Ukraine, and takes credit for a major, bloodless victory in Crimea, which he says "benefited" Russia and the people of Crimea. The ensuing bloody fighting in Eastern Ukraine is barely mentioned.
Sergeo Karpukhin (Pool/AFP/File)
The documentary suggests several things.
First, Putin publicly announces that he ordered Russian security chiefs to "take steps" to annex Crimea on the night of February 22-23, 2014, when it became clear that (former) Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovich may be swept from power.
Putin admits that he ordered Russian special forces to prepare for the takeover of the strategic peninsula for executive "reunification." The Russian military, which had plans for this takeover for at least ten years prior to the actual event, exercised every manner of stealth insertion into the region.
The justification for the takeover, as stated in the film: protection of the Russian majority on the peninsula. Yet such clusters of Russians reside in Estonia, Latvia and Kazakhstan. It is possible that these countries may be next in line. Putin ignores the fact that Crimea is the territory of a sovereign neighboring state, and that its takeover is an act of aggression by any definition of international law.
He further ignores history: Crimea today has a Russian majority only because Joseph Stalin ethnically cleansed the Crimean Tatars from their ancestral homeland in 1944. The Soviets then prevented the Crimean Tatars from returning to their homeland. The Tatars’ representative assembly – the Majlis – desperately tried to stop the March 2014 referendum.
Putin does not consider his actions an aggression, appearing relaxed and downplaying Western punitive sanctions.
Putin claims he moved against the Crimea based on secretly ordered and clandestinely executed public opinion polls. He talks about ordering opinion polls inside Russia before bringing the annexation/"reunification" for a vote in the Russian parliament.
Given Putin’s control of national television and an incessant stream of propaganda about "Ukrainian Nazis" and their plans to "kill" Russian speakers in Crimea, it is not surprising that public opinion favored annexation.
Putin visibly enjoys talking about his direct command of Operation Crimea.
In the film, he does not give credit to any of his fellow leaders, and mildly rebukes Minister of Defense Sergey Shoigu. Indeed, this was a complex feat of covert action, politics and military power projections, which involved Russian special forces, the Russian Black Sea Fleet, air force, Strategic Rocket Forces (which Putin put on alert for the first time since the end of the Cold War). Putin also took the lead, he said, in legal, domestic political and foreign policy realms.
Importantly, the film also makes clear Putin’s comfortable use of violent "informal structures." For example, the film highlights the use of The Night Wolves, a violent ultra-nationalist bikers gang, as essentially a special forces unit serving the Kremlin. The biker gang is lead by Alexander Zaldonstanov, nickmed Khirurg (the Surgeon) – for his propensity to cut people up.
This is a political style known in czarist Russia since the Black Hundreds, the ultra-nationalists who used to kill and rob the Jews. This also happened under Vladimir Lenin, the father of the Soviet state, who found and used a Georgian bank robber named Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin).
The use of massive off-the-books violence is of particular concern, especially when these organizations are used by a nuclear superpower headed by a secret police operative. This should be kept in mind amid growing reports of Russian support for European extreme left and extreme right groups.
The film is a warning to Ukraine, to other countries of the former USSR and to the West: Putin doesn’t regret anything.
He prefers to have his victories bloodless if he can – he has read Sun Tsu, the Chinese military theorist of 2,300 years ago, who teaches that the highest order of victory is when the enemy surrenders without a fight – and this was demonstrated in Ukraine.
However, Putin stresses that his military is now confident in its operational capability and in its Supreme Commander, and he admits, in a déjà vu of the Cold War, that he put the Strategic Nuclear Forces of Russia on high alert – to send a message to the West.
The Crimean operation was an opening act of a new confrontation between Russia and the West. The new Putin documentary demonstrated clearly the scope of the threat faced by the West.
link