Explain Like I'm Five: Putin and Russia

[LambriniBobinIsleworth]

I know that there are lots of knowledge people here, so I'm looking for help in understanding all of this.

I did revolutionary Russia for history A Level about 800 years ago... I know basically what the Cold War was about... I know the Wikipedia outline of who Putin is.... I know basically why Russia invaded Ukraine...but with the death of Nevalny this week I need the whole sorry shit show of Russia explained to me like I'm five because I'm lost.

Most of all I'm confused about how post the collapse of the Soviet Union Russia did have a democratically elected government, and that Putin was originally democratically elected but then stopped having proper democratic elections circa 2003 (is that right?) What happened there to stop the elections being free and fair? And I read somewhere this weekend that another opposition leader died in 2015- shot after speaking out against the beginnings of the Ukraine war.

I did read a lot when the war started in 2022 but if I understood it all I've forgotten it again. Also why is Trump being called out for saying he will support Russia with this NATO stuff? What's going on there, why is he saying he will do that?

I know I sound really stupid, but I'm so confused about all of the various elements of this and putting them together like a jigsaw. I'd appreciate anything anyone can explain to me (in the simplest way possible). Thanks all!

Can people answer the question instead of directing somewhere else or giving snide comments? I don't want to sift through Newsround thanks

We have! How much more bite size do you want it?? 😳

Ex member of the KGB/FSB
Worked in the St Petersburg mayors office in the early nineties
Facilitated the bargain price ‘sale’ of national resources to particular individuals (the formation of the oligarchy), putting together the combined resources of the oligarchs, criminal gangs, ex and remaining KGB/FSB/police ‘friends’ building his way to the head of his own state mafia

Putin built his political career and private fortune funded from a cut in every deal, and aided by those he enabled to have their share of riches
With the backing of money, power and brute force clawed his way up and secured himself in place.
Oppose him and suffer the consequences
Putin changed the laws of Russia to enable him to remain in power for as long as he wants and ensures that Russian ‘democracy’ always gives the right result

Some of us have. Are you the OP?

I answered as have others

Were the answers too simplistic or too complicated for you?

I can c+p the actual articles but clicking the links takes you right there, gives credit to the site and writers and doesn’t clog up the thread. I don’t precis on demand.

I have a masters in international relations and I’d struggle to explain the reasons behind all of this, but here’s a rough breakdown:

On the break up of the USSR, Russia did create a constitution and was technically a democracy.

however, democracy is difficult to impose overnight- look at Iraq/ Afghanistan. People aren’t used to it, and the corrupt practices of the communist system continued.

the big problem was that Russia’s state assets and natural resources were basically given/sold off to a small number of businessmen- the oligarchs. So the country’s wealth is in the hands of a few people.

they appointed Putin as they thought he’d be easily manipulated and would do their bidding. As it happens, Putin wasn’t the Dull bureaucrat they thought he was. He turned on them seized a lot of their assets.

He has also changed the constitution to allow himself to be voted in for another 4 terms- 24 years.

And while there are elections- in practice it’s impossible to be allowed to run without his blessing. He controls the electoral commission who decide who is allowed to run in the election. Look at what happened to Navalny- it takes a brave person to stand up against that.

I’ve just realised there is so much to say - and you’d need to write several books to cover it!

Just as an aside, US Congress have been trying to pass a bill to make it harder for the US to withdraw from NATO under a 'volatile' presidency. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2023/07/19/with-eyes-on-trump-senate-votes-to-make-nato-withdrawal-harder/

The thing that I think people haven't explained, is that Putin was originally elected as prime minister. He served the maximum consecutive term, then swapped out with president, then reverted to prime minister, then president again, and then when he'd served the maximum term as president he changed the constitution so he could carry on.

A lot of the problem is that he rightly fears that if he ever steps down he'll be vulnerable to retaliation and legal consequences. That's what's kept a lot of dictators in place from Caesar onwards.

Trumps statement was total nonsense.

currently all the countries that border Russia are either complying with the 2%, or are on track to comply with the 2% before 2025. Also, the UK. The ones that don’t are behind a wall of paid up NATO members. How is Russia going to attack them without going through complying countries?

Also, more important than their levels of spending is the fact that virtually every NATO country has NATO bases. Which in warfare is the most important thing. Weapons don’t win wars, logistics do. You obviously need armies and weapons and all the rest of it. But an army of 100,000,000 isn’t going to achieve ANYTHING if it isn’t being constantly resupplied. It’s Trump playing to his domestic audience to secure voters who resent the US military spending, acting like if the rest of NATO would spend they could spend less. They can’t and they won’t. Too much is tied up in it.

In fact- on the same topic there is very good reason to suggest that the Russian Nuclear Arsenal is for this precise reason probably useless, though of course no one really wants to gamble on this.

During the advent of the Ukranian invasion Putin had spent billions on modernising the Russian armed forces. They still came up in a pileup because the people who were running the show were crooked as shit, and stole money and told Putin it was all a-ok. Which is why you ended up with a column of iron miles long stalled outside Kiev.

Nuclear weapons have a very short half life, and require very expensive components to be renewed often. Does anyone imagine that they haven’t been rinsed like the rest of the Russian armed forces? Even worse, it’s not like degraded nuclear weapons work but badly, they simply don’t work at all. Nuclear bombs are very difficult to set off, and are vastly expensive to maintain.

The Ukranian war is currently being waged with Cold War era technology. This is why NATO supplies of worn out tanks, generation 1 Ahbrams, Leopard tanks and the like are proving effective. The much vaunted HIMARS systems which are causing so much damage are massively curtailed because they are only allowed the short range missile systems. No one wants to massively provoke Russia by providing the Ukrainians the means to strike Moscow with mobile missile systems that can launch from the Ukranian border.

If the full NATO conventional forces were brought to bear it would look much like the invasion of Iraq. Putin would find himself thrown out of a conveniently placed high window, and they would negotiate quickly. At the moment politics is what is hampering the Ukranian conflict. It is highly likely that a single Carrier Strike Group could impose air superiority over Ukraine AND Russia (and the US alone have 11 of those- the UK another 2).

This hasn’t happened because too much of the world depends on Russian hydrocarbons. Russia can maintain this for a long time because they don’t care about how many people they kill, and don’t care if they send their armed forces to fight a modern army with 50 year old equipment. Russia is still using the USSR playbook.

This absolutely baffles me. It's not that long since the whole reds under the bed Mcarthy witch hunts. The us population was rapidly anti Russian basically until Trump the Treasonous was elected. I think putin owns him in some way, it's the only explanation for how trump is so pro-putin.

Thanks @Hiddenmnetter good explanation.

@LambriniBobinIsleworth this is an excellent site for these exact types of questions.

https://www.vox.com/2024/2/16/24075332/russia-navalny-putin-death-kremlin

But I'm not making an argument, I'm simply expressing my opinion that people who sneer at those who ask a genuine question are twats.

Yes- that's what I meant about Trump, sorry- it's obvious why everyone thinks it's lunacy, I more meant why is he doing it!

I'm going to take that as a genuine suggestion and say thanks

Grade B, but it was a long time ago.

Thanks to everyone who's answered sincerely - going to have a proper read now.

This @AsTheyPulledYouOutOfTheOxygenTent and the last post by @milkingtime have clarified a lot for me- I've been confused as to quite how he got to where he is. The idea that he was seen as a "safe pair of hands" by the oligarchs but has turned out to be less of a man in a grey suit than they had him down as makes a lot of sense. Thank you.

First of all OP I think it is brave of you to recognise that you don't know much about this topic and to want to understand it better.

The sneery responses just show that the people who make them are the ones who are being ignorant...

Anyway my limited understanding of this:

-Putin is a former as an 'intelligence officer': basically he is someone who has no problems with using the good old KGB/FSB methods of assassination, computer hacking, threats and bribes to remain in power. That includes what you are seeing in the news about the main opposition leader being murdered while in prison
-He managed to build a network of people who got themselves wealthy, including abroad (you only have to look at his alleged influence in the Leave campaign...) by supporting him and getting favours back over the years
-He is happy to mess around with the democratic elections process and falsify results to keep himself in power
-Basically he is hard to oppose because of the dangers of doing so and the fact that he still has a lot of support from some powerful and wealthy people
-The West has to be mindful of the fact that Russia has nuclear weapons and gas supplies the we need so they have to be diplomatic when dealing with what is basically a sociopathic dictator

Russia does have a bloody history of overthrowing its dictators sooner or later so he won't be in place forever but as long as the army and other officials stand by him, he will be hard to get rid of...The West can't do it. Only the Russians themselves I think.

Agreed. It’s the weirdest thing ever. I can understand why all this is not a huge topic in the media.

This piece was fascinating. Thanks so much for posting.

Lenin and Stalin weren't overthrown. I suspect only Putin's death will do - there'll probably be some very bloody squabbling afterwards.

It's a few years old now but a book called All the Kremlin's Men, by Mikhaïl Zygar explains Putin's rise very well.

Its really like the mafia meets Game of Thrones.