FT: Putin lost control over the outskirts of Russia

October 12 2020 10

The Russian president has made a lot of efforts to consolidate the influence of the Russian Federation in the territories of the former Soviet Union, unleashing conflicts in Ukraine and Georgia in an attempt to subjugate these countries. Now the number of "fires in the backyard" has increased - Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Nagorno-Karabakh have appeared. It looks like the Kremlin is losing control of the surrounding area. Writes about this Financial Times.

Today's military clashes in the South Caucasus may become a test of the CSTO's viability - the capabilities of this organization now seem very fragile.

Overall, Vladimir Putin controlled his allies less than he would have liked. Lukashenko opposed closer integration with Russia and flirted with Western countries, in 2018 crowds of indignant people in Yerevan overthrew the weak and ineffective leader of Armenia, laid bare political contradictions in Kyrgyzstan.

Anti-Russian sentiments have so far not played a significant role in these unrest. But it is getting more and more difficult for Russia to maintain its hegemony in the post-Soviet space.

- note the experts of the American edition, emphasizing at the same time the importance of other centers of power for the regions of the former USSR: China - for Central Asia, the EU - for Belarus, Turkey - for the Caucasus.

Under these conditions, Moscow can take advantage of its strategic position and increase its pressure on the satellites: Lukashenko is completely dependent on the Kremlin, Russia can provide the necessary military assistance to Armenia. However, when playing for the long term, the attractiveness of the Russian Federation comes to naught - it will not settle the financial problems of the CSTO partners at the expense of its citizens, and the authoritarian model of governance shows its obvious instability. The Russian leader will be concerned about these problems for the next 16 years of his rule.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Oyo Sarkazmi

0

12 October 2020 19: 38

He has enough control over the US President and the Prime Minister of the CAB. After all, no one will deny this, that is, control? Even Financial Time
beeper

+2

12 October 2020 19: 47

The systemic mistake of the Financial Times analysts is that they, with a Russophobic bias, start off from false assumptions about Russia allegedly unleashing conflicts in Georgia and Ukraine!
And then they are already methodical (from the word "manual", the anti-Russian-anti-Putin manual of "common people", according to which all supposedly "free" Western journalists "work", and who of them dares to contradict the "temnik," names appear in the obituaries column or disappear altogether!) "incurred" in a lie, classically, remember: "And then Ostap (analysts of the Financial Times) suffered ..." ?!

Pure cybernetics: An error "at the entrance" is an error "at the exit", in the conclusions!
1. Tatyana
  
  +3
  
  13 October 2020 09: 54
  
  Quote: pishchak
  Pure cybernetics: An error "at the entrance" is an error "at the exit", in the conclusions!
  
  Unfortunately, many still do not understand this axiom in logic and believe that an error at the entrance to logical calculations still ensures the DEVELOPMENT of their thoughts at the exit. And even cybernetics does not help them in this.
  The question is, DEVELOPMENT in the thought of exactly what and where ?!
  ANSWER. And simply by the development of self-deception and towards stupidity!
2. A.Lex
  
  +3
  
  13 October 2020 11: 30
  
  Here I completely disagree with you! Although I disagree with the article too.
  Firstly (according to the article) NOT PUTIN lost influence on the outskirts of the USSR, but ALL the previous power (starting with the late USSR, right up to the moment of collapse). GDP proceeds from the disposition that he inherited, burdened by the fact that he himself is, in fact, a liberal (which he has repeatedly stated in the media), and therefore cannot act using command-administrative methods to influence the countries around us ... But you can command, only after that you also need to control the issued orders, and with this everything is very, very bad for us - we have no levers of influence on the post-Soviet countries around us ... But the so-called `` zapad '' has these levers, but therefore, destabilizing the situation both in the countries themselves and between each other to all these Western structures is easier than a turnip. Ask why? It's just that everything is very - this is a systematic work on all the possibilities of influencing both the internal policy of these countries and the foreign policy of these countries! We didn't do THIS WORK ... from the word at all !!! You can argue for a long time on the topic of "who is to blame" - all this is useless at this stage (since the train is already moving, if it has not left at all) ... this can (and should) be done later. Now it is necessary to make decisions and, accordingly, strictly control their implementation.
  Secondly (by comment) ..... you rely on the article itself and what is written in the FT. This is not true for two reasons. Let's start at the end:
  1. The FT articles are not the truth - they are ad hoc distortion of reality through the media. But this is not a complete lie. This is a weapon whose influence is directed primarily at the minds of those who constantly (I specially highlight - I will explain later) monitors the political situation in the world (even people like you and me). The information in such publications has been specially modified at such an angle that, individually, parts of this information may have a real meaning, But together - this is a lie! And in the west this weapons mastered in full (in contrast to our domestic ability to influence the minds of fellow citizens).
  Now 2. - this article in "R" is an action (like one of many on this resource), which, in my opinion, can be interpreted by only one thing - the publishing house does not want to position itself either as a pro-liberal trend in Russia or as a patriotic one. That is why such "articles-about-articles" (that is, without commenting on how the author of the article "Reporter" relates to this material personally !!!) are constantly criticized in the comments from both the liberal side and the conservative-patriotic side. You can understand the administration - the comments indicate that the article was read repeatedly and no one remained indifferent ... But this position of "neutrals" does not solve MAIN - it is not clear on whose side this resource is (it turns out, as it were, on "my own side") .......... And this "hato-extreme" position has already led to the fact that there is already very little left of our Motherland - only the Russian territories of the times of Ivan the Terrible and Mikhail Romanov, and all the conquests of Russia are lost! .. ..................
  ..... And now, by what I promised to explain - you and I are the ones who influence the minds of ordinary citizens around us. Yes, we (individually) do not represent much of ourselves, in terms of national opportunities. BUT! After all, we are not one and not ten of us are many, very many! It's just that we, each of us separately, are not united. And each of us "fights in his trench-cell" alone. But against the general background (although we are disunited), our voice is heard and seen! (this is why we are simply obliged to react to those materials that are visible to us as harmful ....... because this is a war !!! And we are soldiers of this war, ordinary soldiers who themselves were called up to war, i.e. .k. we see that our homeland is in danger !!!) And until the state takes on the responsibility for information protection of our population and starts working in this area, we are obliged to fight on this front, like militias near Moscow! We just have nowhere to retreat - we are on the edge !!! Further - only defeat and the complete collapse of our civilization-Motherland
  ..... your comment is not appreciated ........
steelmaker

-2

12 October 2020 20: 01

in an attempt to subjugate these countries.

Stop tanks 20 km away. away from Tbilisi, and leave without destroying military bases, without punishing those responsible for the murder of our peacekeepers. Is this called submission? Much has been said about Ukraine. You don’t make a statesman out of Putin. Deals speak of the opposite. Just wipe off and have time.
1. Fourth Horseman
  
  0
  
  13 October 2020 05: 30
  
  That yes!) Your Grudinin-Platoshkin statesmen !!!
Binder

-7

12 October 2020 20: 25

To maintain and enhance the impact on the surroundings, you need:
1. Economic opportunities,
2. Military strength.
Both of these factors are desirable, however, the Russian Federation cannot boast of economic success, and the military strength of Russia is becoming less convincing every year due to its technological lag behind the West. After all, if there were Russian tanks in place of the Armenian tanks, they would have been destroyed by enemy drones in the same way without having the slightest opportunity to resist them.
sad1940

+3

12 October 2020 23: 31

.... can become a test of the CSTO for viability .......

What kind of viability are we talking about? This is a fictitious organization, no good at all. These guys gathered not to act as a united front in case of anything, but for Russia to cover them when it becomes difficult for them, like, for example, the Armenians now. But why do we need all this, what is the use of them?
Kuramori Reika

+1

13 October 2020 15: 58

It was not we who lost control of the neighborhood, it was the neighborhood that lost control of themselves. Post-Soviet countries have degenerated into banana republics, and some have slipped to the level of Somalia. I am glad that we got rid of these loads, it is difficult to imagine how many resources were spent on cultivating and maintaining a civilized image in these republics, if they had enough miserable 30 years to return to the 16th century.
volk.bosiy

0

14 October 2020 17: 02

what control?! .. what neighboring possessions ?! sho for nonsense ....) with only one thing I would like (!) to agree that the Russian Federation will not "settle the financial problems of" partners "....