By seizing a command center and bringing his troops closer to Moscow, the boss of the paramilitary group has challenged the authority of the Russian president, unshakeable so far.
In the aftermath of the rebellion of the Wagner group against the Russian army, Russia is trying, Monday, June 26, to show control of the situation. The “anti-terrorist operation regime” set up during the uprising was lifted and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, who had disappeared over the weekend, appeared on Russian state television in an undated video, reviewing military personnel in Ukraine.
>> War in Ukraine: follow our live dedicated to the conflict
For his part, Vladimir Putin reappeared in a Kremlin video filmed during a forum devoted to industry and youth. Despite this apparent normality, this revolt exposed several weaknesses within the Russian regime.
Sluggish security forces
Within hours on Saturday, Wagner militia troops seized army headquarters in the city of Rostov, a key command center for the Russian assault on Ukraine, “without a shot”, according to Yevgeny Prigojine. The boss of the paramilitary group also claimed that his teams had shot down a Russian helicopter which had “opened fire on a civilian column”.
On the same day, the progress of the mercenaries towards Moscow continued without major opposition from the forces dispatched by the Kremlin: the FSB, the security services, and Rosgvardia (the national guard). According to the US Institute For The Study of War, the Kremlin struggled to mount a quick and effective response to Wagner’s advances due to surprise and the consequences of his heavy losses in Ukraine.
The National Guard was thus unable to halt Wagner’s advance in Rostov, as the militia arrested Russian servicemen. Russian observers quoted by the Institute For The Study of War (ISW) pointed out that the personnel mobilized within Rosgvardia were conscripts, not regular members of the Russian security forces. Wagner “probably could have reached the outskirts of Moscow if Prigozhin had ordered to do so”estimates the American think tank.
“Is it a lack of will, a lack of means, or an unpreparedness of the security forces? It’s hard to say”shade Dimitri Minic, a specialist in the Russian army, in The world.
“Today, the Kremlin’s image and credibility was once again shaken on the central theme of controlling and maintaining security.”
Dimitri Minic, Russian army specialistin the world”
On the side of Russian power, “there may have been desire not to enter into an episode of generalized confrontation”adds researcher David Teurtrie, author of Russia, the return of power (ed. Armand Colin)with franceinfo. “Vladimir Putin seemed to seek more compromise. It is difficult to distinguish what is the real weakness or the strategy”, he ponders. Be that as it may, this initiative by Evguéni Prigojine of “march on Moscow” adds to recent events where the Russian State’s ability to defend its territory has been questioned, such as the incursion of armed groups from Ukraine into the Belgorod region or the attack on drones in Moscow.
Putin’s omnipotence tainted
Scrutinized by all the chancelleries, this crisis “reveals real cracks” at the highest level of the Russian state, said US Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “The fact that you have someone on the inside questioning Putin’s authority and directly questioning why he launched this aggression of Ukraine, that in itself is something very powerful.”said the head of American diplomacy on Sunday.
Through this revolt, “Prigojine showed that it was possible to scare the Kremlin and the Russian regime”adds Carole Grimaud-Potter, specialist in Russia, interviewed by franceinfo. “Putin no longer embodies strength and violence, someone stronger has asserted himself. (…) Godfather Putin’s throne is weakened“adds military expert Pierre Servent on France Inter.
“Vladimir Putin got caught in his own game, where he always sought to create competition between his armed forces to find himself in the position of arbiter. This time, Wagner escaped him.”
David Teurtrie, Russia specialistat franceinfo
The tone used by the Russian president during his speech on June 24 also testifies to this fragility, analyzes sociologist Anna Colin Lebedev, specialist in post-Soviet Russia, in The world. The parallel, in particular with the events of 1917 in Russia, during which the tsarist regime was overthrown by the Bolsheviks, leading to a civil war, contrasted with his previous speeches, where he insisted on saying “everything was under control”.
The mediation undertaken by the Belarusian President, Alexander Lukashenko, to put an end to Wagner’s revolt, also questions the authority of Vladimir Putin. “We can read there a feverishness on the part of the president, who is not in the culture of negotiation with his opponentsconsiders Carole Grimaud-Potter. Vladimir Putin let Lukashenko negotiate and he called on his most loyal allies, like the Kazakh president, to ensure their support.”
However, this strategy is not necessarily a disavowal on the part of the head of the Kremlin. “Putin could neither kill too popular Prigozhin nor ignore his too dangerous expedition”analyzes Franak Viacorka, close adviser to the Belarusian opponent in exile Svetlana Tikhanovskaïa, quoted in Le Figaro. So there remained the solution of “call on Lukashenko to stop Prigozhin without eliminating him”.
An internal attack
“Wagner’s rebellion shatters the myth of the unity of the whole of Russia behind its president”, explains Françoise Daucé, former ambassador of France in Russia, on franceinfo. According to this former diplomat, this rebellion “has stolen the idea of a sacred union behind the president by bringing to light the divisions within the power itself”.
For the first time since arriving in the Kremlin in 1999, Vladimir Putin has shown that he may not be able to protect his people. However, the Russian president has based his power on promises of stability and prosperity. “To the elites enrichment, to ordinary Russians the predictability of tomorrow”summarizes Anna Colin Lebedev with the World.
“The vertical of Russian power is seriously damaged, the elites are questioning it”, says Carole Grimaud-Potter. This crisis could therefore have repercussions in the Russian internal political system. At the regional level, local governors will be able to impose themselves as “political actors” and not mere executors of the Kremlin, says Anna Colin Lebedev in Release. A situation that risks weakening a power “who had attached himself to having only technocrats without political ambitions around him”.
The rebellion has also eroded the support base for the Russian president in ultranationalist circles. Thus, the former officer and Russian nationalist Igor Girkin declared on Sunday that Vladimir Putin should “to transfer” some of his functions to others, if he was not able to control the war in Ukraine, quotes the ISW. But the Russian president has not said his last word. Vladimir Poutine “never makes changes under pressure. However, he could reorganize the army, the Ministry of the Interior or the intelligence services in a second step”, analyzes David Teurtrie. The consequences of this revolt remain difficult to predict.