Human rights lawyer: Victory Day? Putin will never be victorious
Professor on psychology of the Russian president
Vladimir Putin’s Victory Day in Moscow tomorrow will be a hollow celebration of military might because, according to Oleksandra Matviichuk, he will never be victorious in Ukraine.
The Kyiv- based human rights lawyer told the Russian president: “You will never win because we are fighting for our freedom and our survival.”
Matviichuk, head of the nation’s Centre for Civil Liberties, which documents Russian atrocities, said Putin was in danger of falling victim to his own hubris as he leads Russia in the nation’s annual celebration of victory in the Second World War.
The parade, set to take place in Moscow tomorrow, has been widely seen as a crucial moment in the war for Russia. It was thought Putin might use it to claim victory and end the onslaught but UK ministers now fear he is more likely to ramp up the conflict and mobilise Russia for all-out war.
However, Matviichuk said Putin’s invasion had strengthened her nation’s resolve to embrace democracy. She said: “Putin failed. Russia and the Kremlin like symbolism. They would love to have some victory to celebrate on this date but there is no victory for them at all. Ukraine is resisting. We pay a very high price for this resistance so the Russians have to invent things to present as a victory to their own population.
“I would tell Putin that he will never win in Ukraine because we are fighting for our freedom and our very survival. Putin is a victim of his own Russian propaganda. Maybe he is actually starting to believe that Russian and Ukrainians are the same people but they are not. We have other values – the values of freedom. I would tell Putin that he repeats the mistakes of the past.
“We have seen such behaviour from other authoritarian leaders in the past but he is fighting against the future. Sooner or later, he will fade. He will fail.”
Matviichuk’s conviction follows the liberation over the past few days of a series of villages north-east of Kharkiv.
She was speaking ahead of tomorrow’s Victory Day parade in Moscow where thousands of soldiers, tanks and military vehicles will march through Red Square, commemorating victory over Hitler.
It marks the 77th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in the Second World War, known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia. The first Victory Day was in June 1945 when 40,000 troops marched past Stalin. Since then, it was held every year on May 9. In the 1990s, after the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the parade seemed to lose its significance but Putin revived it in a bid to rekindle Russian patriotism.
Some observers, including UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, fear Putin will use the parade to announce a mass mobilisation of reserves, to allow a massive expansion in the Russian army, which is struggling with a shortage of soldiers.
Speaking last month, Wallace said: “I would not be surprised, that he is probably going to declare on May Day that ‘we are now at war with the world’s Nazis and we need to mass mobilise the Russian people’.”
No foreign leaders have been invited to this year’s Victory Day parade and it is also expected to be a third smaller than usual.
However, Matviichuk insists there will be no victory in Ukraine for the Russian president and cited the besieged and ruined city of Mariupol as proof that Putin was not winning. She said: “Will the Russian population perceive places like Mariupol as a victory or not? When you see Mariupol, it is totally destroyed by the Russians.
“Is that a victory when you destroy a city and push hundreds of thousands of people to leave that city? So maybe for Russia it’s a victory but for the majority of people, it is clear that it is not a victory.
“There is no doubt we will resist as long as it is needed – we have no choice. People in Ukraine understand it is a war for survival. We have no other choice. Freedom is the main value for Ukrainians. We will never live in Russian slavery.
“We are fighting to have the right to have a democratic transformation. People have paid a high price to have a government that is independent, transparent and accountable.”
She added: “Kyiv region is much calmer but the situation is still unstable. Several days ago, a Russian rocket hit residential buildings and our colleagues, journalists from Radio Liberty, were killed in their apartment. We are documenting war crimes through various methods. We use open source intelligence and various verification methods and gather testimonies of victims and witnesses of war crimes.”
Yesterday Russian forces fired cruise missiles at the city of Odesa and bombarded a steel mill in the port of Mariupol, hoping to complete their conquest of the city in time for Victory Day celebrations. Ukraine’s deputy prime minister later confirmed all women, children and older adults had finally been evacuated from the steel mill, with the Russian news agency Tass confirming 50 people had left.
But defence expert Tim Ripley said Putin could still produce a surprise at the parade: “Putin loves dramatic public relations stunts so all bets are off for as to what might happen tomorrow morning. Whatever stunt Putin pulls will be designed for maximum propaganda value to drive home to Russians that ultimate victory is only a matter of weeks away. The Russian president will also want to demonstrate to foreign audiences he is still very much in control and up for the fight.”
He is deranged, delusional and sick, rattling through the Kremlin, increasingly isolated and obsessed with legacy and a dream of restoring Russia’s empire.
Or he remains a calculating political strategist, playing the Western powers with the support of his people, in pursuit of a long- view strategy that will, despite short- term military humiliation in Ukraine, still secure swathes of the country as he planned.
Months into his reckless, shambolic invasion, a definitive take on Vladimir Putin’s motivations, physical and mental health, and territorial ambitions remain as elusive as the Russian president himself.
At least one expert in the psychology of political leaders believes the evidence is now overwhelming that Putin has become increasingly dangerous
as he gets older and accustomed to absolute autocracy.
Professor Juliet Kaarbo, chair of foreign policy at Edinburgh University, suggests Putin was once a political opportunist with a pragmatic personality but has lost that sense of sure- footedness because of a number of factors including his advancing age, increasing isolation and hubris.
Kaarbo, co- director of the Scottish Council of Global Affairs, a hub for world- leading expertise, said: “Russia’s choice to invade Ukraine was undoubtedly shaped by a number of factors but given Putin’s concentrated power, it is crucial to understand his state of mind and how it may have changed as a result of his long tenure.
“You become more prone to mistakes and emotionality. There are some authoritarian leaders that seem to have changed as they age. They go to these extremes, they’re more constrained in what they can do, but they also tend to get more confident.
“They tend to see the world in more conflictual way. They rely on fewer and fewer advisors.”
Speculation about 69- yearold Putin’s health has been a constant in recent months with unsourced reports suggesting he has been visited by cancer specialists and commentators suggesting he looks puffy, possibly as a result of treatment. Last week, reports suggested he plans to temporarily to hand over power as he has surgery.
Telegram channel General SVR – allegedly run by an exRussian Foreign Intelligence Ser vice lieutenant- general – said the despot has been informed by doctors the operation will incapacitate him “for a short time”.
He will then, according to the unsourced report, supposedly briefly hand over the reigns of power to an aide.
Kaarbo said the speculation on Putin’s health was just that, but added: “I have done some work on leaders that served a long time. What can happen to them, what happens to their personality? What are some of the dynamics?
“As we all age we can become cognitively rigid and we can focus on leaving our legacy, kind of closing down and confusing the self and the state.
“This can happen to leaders generally as they age and we also have some evidence that this is happening with Putin – that he is thinking about his legacy.
“We don’t know if he’s ill or not but if the speculation is true then some of these age- related psychologies also get exaggerated.”
She said previous campaigns in Syria and Chechnya and his long rule may have lead Putin to overestimate his power. She said: “The longer leaders rule, they become more obviously experienced, but that can lead to overconfidence and just seeing things a certain way.
“Putin has had a lot of successes. He would see as success the fact that he invaded Ukraine before without much pushback from the West.
“So that may have led him to be overly confident. We also know that Putin has changed his beliefs over time. He’s always feared chaos. He’s always been concerned about the greatness of Russia but was a little bit more cautious and pragmatic.
“He also saw that one way for Russian foreign policy and Russian status in the world to be bolstered was by cooperation with the West but that seems to have changed in about 2014.
“His perceptions of Nato and hostility towards Nato seems to have increased over time. The longer you hold power, the more confident you are but you may become more distrustful, more insular and more prone to stereotyping others.”
Kaarbo avoided making easy comparisons to Hitler but said there was certainly one similarity. She said: “Dictators become more and more insular, more drunk on power, more self-confident.
“I am not going to equate Putin with Hitler but both of them, it seems, did not like to hear bad news about was going on in their respective wars.
“With more than 20 years of rule, Putin is a seasoned foreign policy decision-maker and may have changed, over time, from arbiter between different perspectives to an advocate of his own preferences.
“This more ‘top- down’ way of processing information and more advocacy- based style of leadership may have narrowed the advice he received and limited the options he considered when deciding to invade Ukraine.
“A position of p ow e r increases individuals’ self- confidence, hubris, their motivation to dominate others and their sense of superiority, while reducing their ability to empathise with others.
“The longer the leader is in power, the more these effects influence policy choices. Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine may have come from a growing confidence in past successes, or at least in decisions that went well enough to keep him in power.
“As a result, he may have experienced over- confidence in his ability to swiftly control Ukraine, a lack of empathy to anticipate others’ reactions, and a strong need to exert power over others.”