Aggressive war unleashed against Ukraine, an effort to rebuild the empire, economic blackmail of Europe, provoked famine in Africa, and how the Russian people feel about that suggest the only way out – to disintegrate Russia and mould several independent nations on ethnic grounds.
This scenario looks promising today, as separatist attitude in some regions of Russia, currently weak, is likely to grow amid the war in Ukraine.
The multinational authoritarian empire is a historical anomaly at the current stage.
Russia needs to be divided:
- to remove the security threat for Eastern and Central Europe, as Russia believes they are parts of its geopolitical orbit and the Russian Empire,
- to stop using natural monopolies as an instrument to press on foreign democracies,
- to ensure functioning and observance of international law in the world,
- to eliminate threat of using weapons of mass destruction, as the Kremlin is the only one to trade on the issue publicly today. This task requires planning measures to place Russia’s nuclear stockpile and 286 silos and mobile launchers under international control, when the “parade of its regional sovereignties” starts. For that to happen, the allies should find in advance either military solution, or set up a stable government in disintegrating Russia, to prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of “revolutionaries”. Those obstacles, however, in no way diminish the attractiveness of Russia’s collapse scenario within the context of security and supremacy of international law, with return to the world order established after WWII that ensured peace in Europe.
Anticipated benefits of Russia’s division scenario:
- The peoples of Russia that are discriminated, restricted in cultural and social development, would gain independence. There will be no place for empire in small nations.
- Possibility to get access to natural resources on competitive market terms, which is beneficial both for consumers (Europe, China) and for those who live in the regions where they are mined. Not funded by the federal center (Moscow), they will greatly improve the infrastructure and quality of life for the locals.
- Reduced tension and conflict on the world scene involving Russia (Syria, Mali, Sudan, Afghanistan, Libya, Nicaragua, Cuba). Lower number of authoritarian regimes that rely on Moscow’s support in exchange for resources, territory, or standoff with the West.
- The Kremlin stops interfering into democratic processes in the U.S., Europe and other regions.
A key for Russia to collapse is that government revenues first go to Moscow and only then are distributed to regional centers. Russian regions, therefore, are de facto domestic colonies, with Moscow and St. Petersburg drawing on resources from them.
Read also: ‘Economic separatism’ in Russia
But the bulk of these funds is spent by law enforcement officials. Hit by sanctions and global economic isolation, Moscow, that way, will fail to maintain regional infrastructure. The regions will become self-sufficient, leading to formal and informal autonomous units established. In a latent conflict with the federal center, the regions will also start fighting for independence.
The Kremlin’s effort to expand territory by conquest will just deepen disintegration trend and intensify ethnic tensions amid the casualties among the ethnic groups that are not Russian.
The economic ties that keep Russian periphery with Moscow will be broken. But just as in the 1980s, the FSB, until 2025, will fail to contain the centrifugal force that pushed the regions in different directions from Moscow.
We should acknowledge the mistake of the West after the Soviet Union breakup, when it ignored the proposals by CIA Director Robert Gates and Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, “to dismantle not just the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire, but Russia itself, so that it could never threaten the world again”. Mistaken beliefs, however, that Russia could be liberalized and become a democracy have led to current critical pressure by the Kremlin on globalsecurity. That way, we should be ready to support the sovereignty of the Republic of Komi, Tatarstan, Udmurtia and the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), Dagestan, Ingushetia and Chechnya, likely to arise in the medium term.
Advisability of dismantling Russia should not be questioned. First, it will not cause mass exodus. Opportunities available in new countries will boost economic activity in these regions. Secondly, it will increase security and reduce the threats that come solely out of the Kremlin’s imperial ambition or any Russian leader in its current form.
We should realize, at the same time, that Russia, or its parts separately, cannot function as full-fledged democracies. This should not be embarrassing, however: disintegrated, without a federal center, they will focus on economic development, not outward expansion. Ethnic or territorial conflicts are unlikely in that format, as their initiators will have limited resources that could trigger conflicts like the Chechen war. At the same time, the more acceptable scenario is to localize the conflicts within existing Russia than spread the war to Europe, which the Kremlin is now scaring.
The scenario of dismantling Russia is also favorable in the context of the West-China interaction. It will enable Beijing to focus on returning the territories ceded to Russia in the 19th century: Primorye, Sakhalin, Eastern Siberia, the Amur Region, Tyva, Buryatia. That will significantly cool the standoff of the U.S. and Europe with Beijing. On the other hand, China’s focus on strengthening its hand in the Far East will help defuse tensions and even find new common ground between the West and Beijing, to face global challenges. Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott argued that Russia has much of what China needs – raw materials. These are ingredients for the upcoming serious competition, and even conflict. As for now, over the war in Ukraine, the eastern areas of Russia have been left unprotected, with all military units withdrawn from there, as Beijing is likely to take Russia’s geopolitical place. Talbott also believed that Putin’s refusal to recognize the borders that emerged after the Soviet Union collapse could pave the way for “the collapse of the Russian Federation itself.”
Read also: What can trigger Russia’s fall?
That is why Western politicians should get ready and develop a scenario to dismantle Russia, and not count on agreements with Moscow or, even worse, on a natural change of the Kremlin’s policy, which is impossible.
