The “March of Justice” on Moscow by Prigozhin and his “Wagner” mercenaries was a farce worthy of a 90’s American thriller script, set in the collapsing Soviet Union, and hard to imagine in an iron-ruled Russia. the fist of an autocrat with total power for more than two decades.

I think it would be an overestimation of Prigozhin’s historical education to imagine that he was inspired by a trip to Moscow from ancient Romanian or Italian history a century ago. Both Sulla in 88 AD and Caesar in 49 AD. and Mussolini in 1922 marched to Rome in a completely different political and military situation, which also brought them success, but Prigozhin’s decision, as the leader of a mercenary army with a maximum of 25,000 soldiers (actually somewhere around 3-4,000), and without any support from the air, to storm Moscow to remove the corrupt and incompetent leadership of the army, symbolized by Defense Minister Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov, there is something obviously completely insane about it. But I think that, in addition to the fact that he overestimated his importance, Prigozhin relied on the support of some elements of the army (for example, General Surovikin, according to the Moscow Times and other sources, who was already arrested), who at a decisive moment did not have a longer income.

It is hard to believe that the Russian special services, which provided Erdogan with information about the coup attempt in Turkey, did not know about Prigozhin’s intentions and would not have informed Putin.

Both Prigozhin and Kremlin propaganda try to reinforce the idea that both sides had a moment of patriotism, despite their differences of opinion, and that both refused to shed the blood of their countrymen. The reality is that the Russian army lost 7 helicopters (2 Mi-8MTPR1 electronic warfare helicopters, 1 Mi-8 transport helicopter, 2 attack helicopters: Ka-52 and Mi-35 respectively and a command Il-18 command type) and 13 pilots after that , as, according to Prigozhin, Russian aviation would attack civilian equipment. In fact, Russian aviation attacked a convoy of more than 100 units of Wagner anti-tank vehicles (including T-72, T-80 tanks and Pantsir-S1 and Strela-10 air defense systems) on the M4 highway near Voronezh, destroying a number of less than five vehicles of the putschists. Earlier, the Wagnerites occupied Millerovo airport, allowing troops there to continue operations against Ukraine, but in the presence of a Wagner representative to ensure that they would not be directed against the Wagnerites. For such a small contingent, this is no small task, especially if you look at the occupation of Rostov-on-Don, a city of over a million people. Thus, at that time there were signs that part of the Russian army was ready to approve Prigozhin’s plans.

Most NATO commentators whose articles I have read seem to agree that Putin has emerged weakened by the defiance Prigozhin expressed. Personally, I think this is an exaggeration. Putin was indeed humiliated for a day and he and his henchmen fled like goats from Moscow after hearing about the coup attempt, but the reality is that there is no real opposition in Russia at the moment to the Putin system and especially the war against Ukraine. Such high-profile critics as Prigozhin or Igor Strelkin/Ghirkin, the latter insignificant, attack only the way the war has been fought so far, and in no case its motivation. Instruments of party control as they existed under the Soviet Union, such as the Politburo, have disappeared from Russia’s governing structures for more than a decade.

Moreover, it suffices to draw an analogy with the attempted coup in Turkey in 2016, after which the president became more powerful by purging officers and civilians deemed disloyal, and surprisingly won this year’s elections despite allegations of corruption by Sedat Peker and Ali Yeşildağ.

Influential journalist Thomas Friedman writes in the NYT that he fears someone worse could take Putin’s place and asks the rhetorical question, “How would you feel if Prigozhin was in the Kremlin this morning overseeing Russia’s nuclear arsenal?”, saying that he also fears the chaos that could follow after Putin.

But is it possible to find a Russian political or military figure more vengeful, vindictive and cruel than Putin? Any successor to Putin, even if he has to continue the war in the short term to avoid losing face, will be much more inclined to make a peace that would normalize Russia’s relations with the West and Ukraine, placing the blame for the war on his predecessor. Also, I don’t think Putin’s successor will concentrate as much power as he has today.

The fear of a civil war or the division of Russia into fiefdoms of various oligarchs or “warlords” is again greatly exaggerated. The only military leader left after Prigozhin’s impeachment is Ramzan Kadyrov, who has no reason to break relations with the Kremlin, which provides him with subsidies of up to 80% of the republic’s budget. That is why he is so loyal to Putin.

In fact, the facts on the battlefield remained the same. It is unlikely that the Wagnerites will leave occupied Ukraine or Russia and move to Belarus or to civilian life in professions they did not accept.

I think it is too early to see the beginning of the end for Putin. The future is still quite bleak, mainly because Russian society is, on the one hand, in captivity, subjected to repressions that remind us of Romania 35 years ago, and on the other hand, in solidarity with the war against Ukraine as a result of the regime’s nationalist propaganda. The only hope for radical changes is a seizure of power by elements of the special services and the army simultaneously with large demonstrations, at least in the capital, in a scenario similar to the Romanian revolution. But then it was a revolutionary moment in all of Eastern Europe, and part of the communist elite of the time believed that they would gain economic advantages if they came to power through the second echelon. Russia already has an oligarchic system symbiotic with dictatorship, and the oligarchs will risk their positions gained over the past two decades if they depend on a new leader. On the other hand, the current economic sanctions are not at all comfortable for them, and at least some of them can contribute to ending the conflict and changing the leadership. – Read the entire article and comment on contributors.ro