TheCat
If other nations are a bit knoecked off balance, it proves the idea that western liberal democracy is a flawed programme and is in imminent danger of collapse (you'll notice, here, the direct similarity with a lot of the Leave rhetoric which bangs on about the EU being a flawed project, in imminent danger of collapse)
I think there is a danger here of associating very legitimate internal and external criticism of the US, the UK and other states with 'propaganda' or manipulation whose source is Russia. It's not a case of being either with us or against us. Plenty of posters here opposed the Iraq war and continue to hold Tony Blair in poor esteem because of his lies and his toadyism and his very poor judgement. The scorn is amply justified imo.
Bernie Sanders for instance continues to offer trenchant criticism of how the US is run, and to offer the analysis that it is a flawed project and how it could be improved. He garnered a huge amount of support in the primaries. Martin Luther King's theme was similar but with a different focus. Russia opposed the Iraq War on grounds that there were no weapons of mass destruction there, and rightly complains about the destabilisation of the middle east that was caused by the foreign policy adventures of Messrs Bush and Blair, and continued by Hillary Clinton as Sec of State - in Egypt, in Syria, in Libya, and in Ukraine. Say what you like about Yanukovych, he was democratically elected, and the succeeding administration of Yatsenyuk was hand picked by the State Department after a revolution that was at the very least encouraged by the US, and midwifed by some very dodgy elements in Ukraine.
I also think there is a danger of over-analysing. Often, when an event happens, or seems to happen, there is a tendency to look back with slightly better than 20-20 hindsight, and pick out all the signposts along the way that led to that point, thus confirming its inevitability and simultaneously confirming whatever we may believe about a national culture or national myths. It is often a better idea to look at chronology - to establish what happened and what happened next. In the case of Russia's decisions over the last ten years, we can note that Moscow has been very efficient at capitalising on US/UK missteps, and has managed to turn several situations to its advantage, none of which were caused by Moscow.
Who is now best friends with Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, president of Egypt, whose run was backed by Moscow after he dispatched the Muslim Brotherhood government that came to power in the wake of the Arab Spring that was encouraged, at the least, by the US (and resulted in the deposing of a staunch US ally)? www.voanews.com/a/putin-in-egypt/4158252.html This Voice of America article details Egyptian support for Russia in Syria, Saudi softening towards Russia, the US being sidelined in Egypt, hopes that Russia will be able to rein in Iran - all thanks to ill-considered intervention and a far more aggressive policy of reshaping the middle east than was warranted. Russia appears to have a far more deft hand than the US in the middle east. (Flights were in fact resumed).
Syria is another case in point - Russian intervention has been crucial in almost wiping ISIS/Daesh out, and will most likely be successful in the end. Russia will have a seat at the table when the future of Syria is discussed. In fact, Russia will decide who else sits there. Russia has demonstrated to a region that is heavily armed (thanks to the west and to Russia too) and not even close to democratic in its political culture that it is not interested in revolution or the deposing of rulers. The US by contrast has shown that it can turn against allies. This was perhaps a factor in the decision of Erdogan to take Turkey off the western engagement track and to set off on its own path.
Ukraine continues to suffer from a deeply corrupt political culture.
'The Toxic Coddling of Petro Poroshenko' foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/13/the-toxic-coddling-of-kiev-ukraine-poroshenko-yatsenuk/ gives an idea of the issues and asserts that western backing of Poroshenko & Co is ultimately not doing Ukraine any favours. It turns out that basket cases sometimes get that way and stay that way all by themselves, but the article argues that throwing good money after bad only enables the crooks. Poroshenko’s power lunch is the latest iteration of what is by now a predictable pattern. Every few months, new corruption allegations rock the government; Western diplomats fly in to issue rebukes and pleas for Ukraine’s leaders to think of their people; Kiev promises to do better; the West relents. In the meantime, reforms stagnate, the grip of the oligarchs tightens, and the Ukrainian people grow even more disillusioned. This is a country where the heirs to the 1st Galician SS have already effected one revolution in the recent past. (Interesting to note Victoria Nuland testifying on how badly wrong her choice of Yatsenyuk turned out to be.) Russia capitalised on the disarray by encouraging separatists in eastern Ukraine, and by moving into Crimea. The situation is yet to be resolved, but it is unlikely that Crimea's short lived residence in Ukraine is permanently over, and it may well be that Ukraine becomes a second Ireland - divided by a border along tribal lines to solve a problem that nobody has the will to tackle.
I don't think it's necessary for Russia to prove anything about the west, and I don't think that is what Russia is doing, though Russians do love irony. Russia has got over communism far faster than the west has, and sees that the new wind that is blowing is Mercantilism Part II, with China leading the charge.
China has forged ahead with relationships in Africa and Pakistan (eg. Gwadar Port and railway development) and elsewhere, and has turned into a superpower - maybe the only really important one - without firing a shot, by means of currency manipulation before, during and after the financial crisis, playing fast and loose with intellectual property, and importing cheap primary products while exporting value-added finished products.
Meanwhile, chaos in the EU and the UK stands to benefit the mercantilist Donald Trump and his administration.