What if US President Donald Trump's description of Russia as a "paper tiger" was not just a provocation, but a disturbing reality for the Kremlin ruler? At least that's what one might think when listening to Alexander J. Motyl, an American historian and professor of political science at Rutgers University in Newark, who now calls Russia not only a "vassal" of Beijing, but also a "junior partner" of Pyongyang.
From the Middle East to Africa, from the United States to Europe, this expert, who recently made his political diagnosis in the columns of Foreign Policy, makes a dizzying assessment of the loss of Russian power, especially under the impetus of the invasion of Ukraine and the imperial policy - full of "mistakes" - of the Kremlin master.
Alexander J. Motyl also reconsiders the thesis of the American political scientist Alexander Cooley, who argued a few months ago in L'Express that Vladimir Putin has managed to "resurrect" Russia's influence in the post-Soviet space. According to our expert, however, even Belarus, a symbol of Russian influence, is seeking emancipation: "If Lukashenko were really Putin's lackey, he would have had to join the war against Ukraine [...] Even he seems to be looking for opportunities to escape from Russia's orbit."
L'EXPRESS: In your opinion, Russia's influence in the world is weakening. How did you come to this conclusion?
ALEXANDER MOTYL: The best illustration of the decline of Russian power is its current relations with China, North Korea and perhaps even Cuba. Russia now relies heavily on China for its energy exports, but also for everything related to the technological components of its missiles - to the point that Russian politicians travel to Beijing to convince the Chinese to strengthen their cooperation in this area. Russia has become a vassal of Beijing, or at least a junior partner.
It is important to realize that three or four years ago, no one would have said this. Russia was clearly inferior to China economically, but at least militarily it was capable of doing it. It certainly would not have asked for help, as it is now. Then there is its relationship with North Korea, which is not a great power. This is precisely what is striking: Russia, a former great power, now requires technological components, military support, and even ammunition from a country that is not even of the caliber of China.
Therefore, Russia is not only a vassal state of China, but also a junior partner of North Korea... This may seem a bit extreme, but it is a fact that Pyongyang seems to be making the important decisions, such as deploying thousands of soldiers to the war. And so I come to Cuba, an island suffering from a US embargo and struggling to maintain its economic viability.
And yet, despite this, according to information from a Ukrainian government organization called "I Want to Live", North Korea is providing mercenaries to Russia, despite claiming otherwise. These three examples are just a few, but they alone show the extent to which Russia has lost its great power status. The stalemate in Ukraine is, of course, a significant indicator of Russia's weakness.
L'EXPRESS: Continue...
AL. MOTYL: A great power would have defeated Kiev - whose army was poorly developed and short of ammunition - three years ago. Maybe not in three days or even three weeks, but it would have won. Imagine if the US had invaded Mexico and managed to take three or four northern provinces. If three and a half years after the invasion the United States had lost about a third of these provinces while Mexico was still fighting, we would all consider it a huge humiliation for the United States.
And that is exactly what is happening to Russia right now. The performance of the Russian army is disastrous at every level. That does not mean that they will lose, but they are probably no longer capable of winning. It is now quite possible to imagine that Ukraine could win this war.
L'EXPRESS: Doesn't Russia still maintain a strong presence elsewhere in the world, especially in the Middle East or among some populist parties in Europe?
AL. MOTYL: Not really. After the fall of Bashar al-Assad, Russia was unable to compensate for this loss. Moscow also supported Hamas and Hezbollah. But these movements seem, at least for now, to have lost ground. Similarly, Moscow has played no significant role in the ongoing peace process between Hamas and Israel. As for India, while it maintains cordial relations with Russia, it also insists on paying much less for the energy it imports, which is hardly a sign of friendly relations. And let’s not forget Europe, Russia’s former main trading partner.
It is true that Putin has long enjoyed the support of some far-right parties, but they have become relatively skeptical of his intentions and have realized that their country needs to rearm against Russia. It is also worth noting that NATO, which in 2014 frankly did not know why it existed, suddenly mobilized after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This does not mean that it has solved all its problems, but at least it has realized the need to increase security spending.
All this confirms that geopolitically Russia is no longer the power it claims to be - to the point of looking for allies where it would not have done so before. But this observation is also valid in domestic politics! The Russian economy is in an extremely bad state, so much so that one wonders how much longer it can sustain the war. Taking all these factors together, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Russia is collapsing as a great power.
L'EXPRESS: Some might reply to you that certain regions where Russia has lost influence may no longer be a priority for the Kremlin. Recently, researcher Mikhail Komin explained in our columns that one of the Kremlin's new priorities will be the Arctic...
AL. MOTYL: It is true that this is one of the Kremlin's priorities. Therefore, one might think that the withdrawal from Africa and the Middle East, for example, was an opportunity for Russia to expand its influence in other regions. This is probably partly true. But it is not that Russia simply weighed the pros and cons, ultimately deciding that its presence in Syria or Mali was unnecessary and that its resources would be better used in the Arctic.
This was not the Kremlin's choice! It was forced to do it. So this is not at all the same as, say, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Even the most striking example of Russian influence, Belarus, is a bit more complicated than it seems.
L'EXPRESS: What are the deep reasons for this loss of influence for the Kremlin?
AL. MOTYL: If there is one factor that outweighs all the others, it is perhaps the war in Ukraine, the outbreak of which was a strategic mistake of the highest order. Not only are over a million Russian soldiers dead or wounded, but the economy is teetering on the brink of recession, and Putin has failed to achieve his goals on the ground. In doing so, Russia has alienated a significant portion of the world, as well as a large portion of its own population and elites.
Of course, it has compensated for this with its alliances with North Korea and China. But, as I have said, this is more evidence of Moscow’s weakness than its strength. Therefore, the war is a disaster for Russia. It is a disaster for Ukraine as well, except that the latter will emerge with stronger political institutions and a consolidated national identity. The second reason is Vladimir Putin himself and the dictatorial regime he has established. He is the one who made the decision to invade Ukraine. He holds the power and has the authority to exercise it.
If Putin were the great grandmaster he is often portrayed to be, he would not have made many of the mistakes we have witnessed, the most serious of which is the war in Ukraine. His support for Viktor Yanukovych in 2004 was also one of them. Just as the assassination of Alexei Navalny and other dissidents around the world did not improve Russia's image, Putin also made the mistake of provoking the Europeans with his drones and other interventions.
Of course, if he wants to start a war, that's the right way. But starting a war when you're already fighting one that you can barely sustain seems to me the height of idiocy. But that's hardly surprising: when you're the only person in power, there's a good chance your subordinates won't tell you the whole truth...
L'EXPRESS: If the war against Ukraine is contributing to Moscow's loss of influence, why is the Russian president continuing on this path?
AL. MOTYL: This war is Vladimir Putin's war. He has completely identified with it. So the problem is that any outcome that is not a clear victory for the Russian side will be perceived by Putin as a defeat. He believes that it is essential to win this war in order to maintain his legitimacy and authority. If he loses, or if public opinion at home and abroad perceives him as a loser, his legitimacy and authority will be called into question. That is the first.
Second, this man is deeply steeped in Russian imperial ideology. Putin, a pure product of the KGB, has been trained in these ideological issues. He has embraced them from the very beginning of his rule. His continuous interventions in Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, and Belarus over the past 25 years, his displays of force toward the Baltic states, his attempts to maintain Russian influence in Kazakhstan and Central Asia are both attempts to maintain control over Russia’s backyard, but also expressions of a broader imperial mentality.
L'EXPRESS: Ursula von der Leyen recently condemned the "hybrid war" waged by Russia against Europe through drone flights over strategic sites and influence campaigns during elections. Doesn't this point to a real threat?
AL. MOTYL: Drones and cyberattacks can certainly cause significant damage to Western solidarity, even though Russia is in a stalemate in Ukraine and has lost its geopolitical influence in the world. After all, it doesn't cost much - probably a few thousand dollars! And since Russia produces thousands of drones a week, it can certainly send a dozen of them over Europe. Moreover, it is a very simple procedure.
Organizing sabotage operations is a little more complicated, but again, it does not represent a huge expense. Therefore, the answer is yes, Russia can influence the West without its usual intermediaries. We can even assume that the weaker it becomes geopolitically, the more likely it is to resort to this kind of inconvenience. It is not through drones or, more generally, through European airspace that Russia will succeed in launching a military invasion of Europe. Low costs mean low risks and low profits...
L'EXPRESS: A few months ago, the American political scientist Alexander Cooley expressed the opinion in our columns that Vladimir Putin has managed to "resurrect" Russia's influence in the post-Soviet space. Specifically, despite the sanctions, he has managed to re-export goods through the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union...
AL. MOTYL: Azerbaijan is certainly not a vassal state of Russia. Georgia, for its part, until recently maintained quasi-independence for 25 years. And if you look at the Central Asian countries, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are doing everything they can to develop their economic and political relations with China. That leaves Kyrgyzstan, which has always been somewhat outside Russia's sphere of influence; Turkmenistan, a country that no one wants as an ally; and Tajikistan, which is unfortunately very poor and extremely disadvantaged.
If we look at these countries and ask ourselves where Russia has retained or gained influence, the only clear answer is Belarus and perhaps Georgia. Or, to be completely generous, Armenia and Kazakhstan. That makes four of the fourteen countries of the former Soviet Union. And in reality, even the most impressive example of Russian influence, Belarus, turns out to be a little more complicated than it seems.
If Lukashenko were truly Putin's puppet, he should have joined the war against Ukraine. Instead, he is resisting. He recently met with some of Trump's envoys and released some 52 political prisoners. He seems to be looking for opportunities to expand his room for maneuver.
Of course, this is Lukashenko; he is a cunning fox. However, even he seems to be looking for opportunities to escape Russia's orbit.