Supporters of the escalation of aggression against Ukraine criticize the Kremlin’s actions. The “hawks” are also competing with each other, and the director of the show, Putin, sometimes loses control over the development of the plot.
Although the heavy fighting around Bakhmut continues, the war has reached a stalemate. The Ukrainians are waiting for Western equipment to arrive. Meanwhile, the Russians are concentrating on reinforcing their forces and launching a larger offensive. It is a watch-and-wait strategy for both sides. The war at this stalemate stage offers little hope for a peaceful resolution. The situation on the battlefield also precludes any diplomatic solutions for the time being.
Such a situation on the eve of the anniversary of the aggression against Ukraine does not encourage Vladimir Putin to think about or explain what comes next. On the contrary, Putin keeps his lips sealed and rarely speaks about the war. Unspecified goals have been characteristic of Kremlin policy since the war began. Apart from Putin’s initial statements that he was concerned with the “demilitarization” and “denazification” of Ukraine, a code of silence followed. This tactic is very convenient. It is easy to move on from failures without publicly stating one’s goals and strategies.
However, the views of others quickly filled the information gap created by the Kremlin’s conspiracy of silence. Common sense is that of the Russian opposition and critics of the aggressive war. It is a false way of thinking. Nothing of the kind is happening in Russia. Putin’s political opponents are on a short leash and have few opportunities to address Russian public opinion. The Kremlin does a lot to gag them. Such an attitude has opened a window of opportunity for the radicals, the “dogs of war,” to express their true feelings about the Moscow establishment. They have begun to identify their goals for the war and to reveal the extremely Kremlin-critical opinions that the war must be conducted differently, with a more proactive approach. They also pointed out the need to improve the way the Russian army is led. Among the most outspoken radicals are Yevgeny Prigozhin, the owner of a mercenary company called Vgnerians. Or Igor Girkin, a former pro-Russian separatist warlord and leader of a large group of minor bloggers and columnists.
Strelkov vs. Wagner
Igor Girkin, who goes by the nickname Strelkov, rose to prominence during the first phase of Russia’s war against Ukraine. In 2014, he was first the commander of the so-called separatists in Slovyansk, Donetsk region, and then the “defense minister” of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic. He served in the army during both Chechen wars. He was a Federal Security Service officer – most likely in the military counterintelligence of FSS structures operating within the armed forces.
For many Russian radicals, Girkin is a hero. He certainly has an excellent “personal resume,” a summary of his “political work achievements and qualifications” typical of a cunning individual. They are suitable for the position of warlord he holds, as it tends to be in Putin’s Russia. Since the beginning of the war, he has become one of the fiercest critics of the Russian command. Within the first weeks of the aggression, he began to complain on social media channels that Russia had thrown insufficient forces into Ukraine. Last year, a Dutch court sentenced him in absentia to life in prison for complicity in the downing of the Malaysian Boeing MH 17 in July 2014. Last March, he called for general mobilization. He said that Defense Minister Sergei Shoygu should be locked up for his disgraceful way of conducting the military operation at the front. Later he recommended Shoigu’s execution.
He became the point man and called Putin a clown. He analyzed every failure of the Russian army and predicted further defeats. Finally, in October, Girkin allegedly went to war himself. He posted photos online of himself in uniform somewhere “at the front. Internet users quickly discovered his deception. He was in the Rostov region, far away, safe from the front! The Ukrainians came for him and put a $100,000 reward on his head. He knew that they would come for him. At that point, the Kremlin slanderer suspended his journalistic activities. But not for long. In December, Girkin returned from the “war” and re-invested his energy in the propaganda war with a sarcastic tone.
“Will it be possible to starve Ukraine before we die here? Of course, you can believe it…” Strelkov mocked in the last recording.
Television channels do not invite Girkin to tell his version of the war. In Russia, however, it is possible to go to jail very quickly for minor criticism of the “special operation” and the authorities. Even for harmless statements on social media. Meanwhile, Girkin became notorious for his online recordings. He stated that the Kremlin authorities were hiding the truth from citizens that Russian territory was being shelled by Ukrainians on a daily basis.
Our authorities are capable of anything when it comes to the highest levels of cretinism. I believe that our leaders will break the limits and push the limits of creativity in this regard,” said Girkin.
In late January, his fuss met with resistance. Girkin was not attacked for a long time, until he started a conflict with Yevgeny Prigozhin and his Wagner Group. The mercenary battles for Soledar and Bakhmut, which resulted in thousands of casualties, were used by Girkin to promote himself. He denounced the “Wagnerians” and believed that they were incapable of fighting and would never replace the regular army. Prigozhin wanted to score some points and prove that he was capable of victory on the battlefield after the change of command. His intention came after Valery Gerasimov, a general who strongly distanced himself from the idea of a leading role for the “Wagnerians,” replaced their ardent supporter Sergei Surovikin.
Who is the coward?
Prigozhin decided to confront and provoke his most prominent critic. He challenged Girkin to join the ranks of the Wagnerians and go to the front as a troop commander to prove his bravery. At the same time, a wave of criticism of Girkin poured out in the Russian media associated with Prigozhin.
A cowardly creature, a loggerhead when it comes to the art of war, he chatters only for the sake of applause in his channels on Telegram,” said critical of Girkin Igor Bezler alias “Bies,” one of the pro-Russian warlords of the so-called separatists known for the 2014 operation in Donbass.
Girkin rejected Prigozhin’s challenge. He expressed that he would not join the “Wagnerians”. In response, the owner of Wagner’s took to his social media to insult Girkin in the most vulgar way. The term “coward” was among the mildest.
Prigozhin came out the loser in this quarrel of war tyrants. The Kremlin did not stand up for him. Moreover, it agreed to the brawl and washed its hands of Girkin’s criticism of the mercenaries and their conduct of the war. There is a reason for this. There has always been a fully controlled game with pawns in the media and political space managed by special services. There has always been a place for radicals in Russian politics. Sometimes they were even allowed to condemn the Kremlin. As in the case of Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who died a year ago. The Kremlin allows the discussion about aggression against Ukraine to continue. It accepts radical opinions and calls for escalation from war hawks. Such appeals from big mouths like Margarita Simonyan, Vladimir Solovyov or other propaganda icons flow daily from the TV screens.
Girkin’s publication has a somewhat different dimension. TV propagandists do not directly criticize the command. They do not question the war strategy as Girkin does. Somehow he gets away with it. He is probably in constant contact with the intelligence services. He is carrying out an important project together with other controlled critics of the Kremlin. His goal is to channel real and authentic feelings about how they are conducting the war. Girkin, after all, does not question the very idea of war against Ukraine, but has only commented on how they supervise the army.
Prigozhin, who also criticized the army leadership, had political ambitions. He became a rival of the Kremlin. He became a dangerous rival to the Moscow administration. He is wealthy, has media connections and allies like Ramzan Kadyrov. He also has a private army. For Putin, nothing is more threatening to his position than violating the monopoly of power outside the control of the Kremlin’s political technology specialists. He is playing a risky political game of Russian roulette. But the media clashes of the “war dogs” are to the liking of the Kremlin, and to some extent even created by the authorities. In the end, however, they show how the war has weakened Putin’s monopoly on the government of souls.
Everything points to that conclusion. The war may last a long time and will require Russians to make even more effective sacrifices of their quality of life and the lives of their loved ones. If there is no spectacular victory, critics of the Kremlin will gain popularity. Eventually, the warring “bull terriers” may cease to be mere elements of intrigue and become independent and power-threatening political entities. Then Putin will go to the dogs.
Michał Kacewicz / belsat.eu
The opinions and thoughts expressed in this text reflect the author’s views only.
Translated by PEV
The opinions and thoughts expressed in the text reflect only the author's views.
