Why Prigozhin's march failed to turn into Syria for Russia

The brief "window of opportunity," which could have aired out the suffocating corridors of the Kremlin, shut quickly. Within two days, the Tsar regained control — first over himself, then his army, his media, and his inner circle. The rebellion was crushed, and Prigozhin was executed in dramatic fashion. The system became even more rigid. Meanwhile, the war machine shifted into higher gear.

The world wasn’t ready for Prigozhin’s rebellion. It watched with wide-open eyes, paralyzed and fearful, as Russia teetered on the edge of collapse. In the West, there was a quiet consensus: better to keep the Tsar in place than face the chaos of an empire falling apart. Unchecked disintegration would bring unpredictable fallout.

In Ukraine, we couldn’t influence the situation then — and even now, we shy away from accelerating the empire’s collapse. We stick to linear tactics, hoping that a "wall-to-wall" approach will yield results. But the strategic goal remains: to eliminate the artificial construct called the "Russian Federation" from our borders. We need new neighbors — states with their own identities, free from Moscow’s imperial ambitions. They, not us, should be the "buffer zone" between the West and Moscow. They should bear the burden of living "between a rock and a hard place."

But Ukraine doesn’t have a plan for this yet.

And so, we keep walking the path we’re on. Waiting for others to shape our strategy according to their fears and interests. For now, we wait…

Source

About the author. Viktor Shlinchak, Chairman of the Board of the Institute of World Policy

The editorial staff does not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.