A week ago, the head of the Wagner troop marched in the direction of Moscow with heavily armed fighters. What follows from this event? Gwendolyn Sasse, Director of the Center for East European and International Studies in Berlin, classifies the events.
SRF News: When you think back to last weekend, what was the big open question for you?
Gwendolyn Sasse: The main question was whether and to what extent elites from the Russian army and the security apparatus would join the Wagner troops and whether this movement towards Moscow could have turned into something more. That was certainly the main question for Wagner boss Prigoschin. He then decided to call off the advance when it became very clear that there was not enough support. But the fact that it has gotten this far shows that at least important elites have not opposed it.
But did the allegiances work? Did the security and military apparatus stand by Putin?
In large parts. However, the mere fact of being able to take over the military command in Rostov means that the people in Rostov knew that this was happening and did not oppose it. And then getting as far as Moscow means that many in the military and security apparatus tended to look on. Many have not positioned themselves clearly.
The first cracks in the system have become publicly apparent. But overall the system is still holding up.
One cannot assume that the loyalties will all last in the long run. The first cracks in the system have become publicly apparent. But overall the system is still holding up. We can assume that Putin will make every effort to ensure that this scenario with private armies and violent actors turning against the system cannot repeat itself.
Can Putin take action against his own people when there are perhaps a relatively large number of them?
We don’t know how many there are. We also don’t know what, for example, the Russian soldiers at the front even noticed about what happened. We cannot assess the level of support for Putin within the Russian army.
However, we have seen images showing that Prigozhin and his troops, who are revered as war heroes, do have support. Conversely, this means that Putin cannot bet on the support of everyone involved in the war, even in the first row. But beyond that, we don’t currently see any real liberal opposition left in the country to make itself heard. In society, too, we tend to see a desire for stability.
What we saw last weekend is a sense of instability. That is a risk for an authoritarian ruler like Putin.
What we saw last weekend is a sense of instability. That is a risk for an authoritarian ruler like Putin. It is also perceived as a danger by society, even in an authoritarian society.
Neither the elites nor society see any clear political alternative to Putin at the moment, for which one would then really switch allegiances. In my opinion, some form of change must also begin at the elite level. Society itself has been so shaped for so long that momentum will not come from there. But this feeling of instability alone leaves a rift and perhaps a shaky trust in the current leadership.
Could that be a problem in an authoritarian system?
In any case. An authoritarian ruler must fear that. Because everything depends on stability. Putin needs to present himself as the person in control of events.
The conversation was conducted by Simone Hulliger.