How a Personal Feud and Strategic Failures Pushed Russia to the Brink
(LONDON) – The decision making capacity and behaviour of the Russian dictator leading up to the invasion of Ukraine were heavily influenced by his pandemic isolation. During this period of hibernation, he surrounded himself with individuals holding extreme views on Russian history and destiny. The Russian dictator fully embraced this narrative and adopted the role of an amateur historian, severely distorting the historical interpretation of modern Ukraine. Experts suggest the ongoing conflict has placed an enormous strain on the 73 year old autocrat. Although he occasionally masks this fatigue during marathon press conferences where he displays a remarkable memory, the decades of pressure are visibly taking their toll. The Russian dictator is now primarily concerned with his physical survival and his historical legacy.
The war unleashed in Ukraine is central to his ultimate survival, meaning he feels compelled to secure a victory that remains entirely out of reach. State media continues to falsely suggest that Russia holds the strategic initiative. Daily propaganda reports claim the Russian army is advancing and capturing small settlements with unstoppable momentum. Despite pushing this narrative for over a year, the reality on the ground tells a completely different story.
Ukrainian strategists demonstrate a profound understanding of Russian psychology by actively showing the Russian elite and broader society that this war cannot be won. As Russian forces fail to make necessary progress, questions are inevitably arising regarding the true purpose of the conflict. A recent broadcast by Steve Rosenberg on the BBC highlighted the effect of four years of war, featuring an elderly woman outside Moscow who openly questioned the point of the mounting death toll. As more citizens ask these fundamental questions, the Kremlin faces a growing problem in managing the public mood. The state propaganda machine remains effective in keeping society quiescent, yet many Russians are deeply unhappy and realise the Russian dictator is leading the country over a precipice. However, a pervasive collective apathy prevents them from gaining the momentum needed to enact change.
Ukraine has capitalised on this vulnerability by inflicting missile strikes on important targets within Russia. These operations consistently disrupt air traffic in Moscow and St Petersburg, raising awareness that the scope of the war is no longer limited to distant frontlines. In border regions like Belgorod and Bryansk, successful Ukrainian attacks on power plants have plunged towns into darkness and disrupted heating supplies. The Russian system has proven highly ineffective at reacting to these local emergencies. Meanwhile, the Russian dictator has centralised power to an unprecedented degree. While this allows for rapid top level directives, it results in a total paralysis of power at regional and local levels, further inciting anger among ordinary citizens.
The Ukrainian strategy aims to broaden this inconvenience to compel more Russians to ask why the war continues and why the promised three week capture of Kyiv never materialised. Now entering its fifth year, the conflict has touched countless families who know soldiers who have been killed or wounded. The Russian system is building rehabilitation centres, but the care for deceased soldiers’ families and returning casualties remains severely patchy.
Understanding that this is a prolonged conflict with limited resources, Kyiv also recognises that Donald Trump is actively working against their interests. Following an August meeting in Anchorage where Trump rolled out the red carpet for the Russian dictator, the US leader effectively gave the Kremlin until the end of the year to secure a ground victory without applying any pressure. Trump appeared to view the conflict in simplistic terms of winners and losers, urging a swift conclusion. Yet, the Russian dictator failed to capitalise on this timeline. This failure has boosted Ukrainian morale, as society wholly rejects the impossible compromises Trump seeks to impose, which would require abandoning heroically defended territory and imperilling future security.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is currently navigating this diplomatic challenge with great skill. The intensely personal feud between the two leaders traces back to a 2019 meeting in Paris alongside the French and German leaders. Advised that Zelenskyy would easily cave to Russian terms for eastern Ukraine, the Russian dictator arrived supremely confident, viewing the Ukrainian leader as an amateur showman. Instead, he discovered steel in Zelenskyy’s spine. The Ukrainian president entirely disputed the terms, leaving the Russian dictator absolutely livid. His transformed body language and tone marked a pivotal moment, cementing a vindictive obsession to destroy Zelenskyy by any means necessary.
Zelenskyy’s background in the rough 1990s environment of Kryvyi Rih equipped him to stand up to the Russian dictator, whose behaviour mirrors that of a mobster leader. Over four years, Ukraine has defied the Kremlin by launching a surprising 2023 offensive into Russian territory, destroying strategic bomber fleets with ingenious lorry mounted drones, and striking intercontinental ballistic missile plants and oil refineries. The resulting rage from the Kremlin is palpable. However, if the Russian dictator cannot achieve his goals and Trump loses interest, the situation becomes precarious for Moscow. Trump is curiously reluctant to criticise the Russian dictator, but he may simply abandon the effort if he realises Russian weakness and Ukrainian strength.
Meanwhile, the United States has placed pressure on Ukraine to outline a timetable for elections. Holding free and fair elections under constant bombardment is an impossible demand, as Russian forces will not suspend drone strikes for a ballot. The logistical challenges involving millions of displaced citizens across regions like the Donbas make the prospect unfeasible. Zelenskyy has played along with these demands diplomatically. Should elections eventually occur, he is highly likely to run again and win. This would deliver the ultimate humiliation to the Kremlin, which has spent years falsely branding his administration as a Nazi regime, a deeply ironic claim given Zelenskyy’s Jewish heritage. While future elections might introduce new challengers and prompt investigations into the initial war preparations covered brilliantly by Luke Harding in the Guardian, Zelenskyy’s current leadership remains resolute against the Russian threat.
