As talks to end the war in Ukraine gather momentum, Vladimir Putin seems more determined than ever to fight. In his New Year's address, the Kremlin leader displayed unwavering optimism about his chances of "victory" on the eve of the fourth anniversary of the conflict. Two days earlier, without providing any evidence, Moscow accused Kiev of carrying out a drone strike on the Russian presidential palace in the Novgorod region.
This cast renewed doubt on his intention to sabotage diplomatic talks - especially after a CIA report refuted the Russian claims shortly afterwards. "Any sign of weakness on the part of the West only pushes the Kremlin to exert even greater pressure", analyzed historian Françoise Thom in an interview with the French newspaper L'Express.
"When Western leaders say they want to start a dialogue with Russia, Putin interprets this in terms of the balance of power. His logic? If his opponents want to negotiate, it is because they are in a weak position and this is the perfect moment for him to take advantage of his advantage."
In his new book "Vladimir Putin's Total War", this specialist on the USSR and post-Soviet Russia analyzes in detail the infernal machine that runs the Russian regime, its way of thinking and its ambitions beyond Ukraine.
L'EXPRESS: In your book you write that Putin operates "in the same mental universe" as other Russian tyrants before him. What do you mean by that?
FRANCOISE TOM: Russian history is unique in that it is marked by episodes of self-destructive madness on the part of its leaders. One of the first such examples was Ivan the Terrible. He brought about the ruin of the country by creating the oprichnina - a section of state territory appropriated by the tsar, while the rest of the country was left to plunder. This was followed by a period of complete anarchy from which the country took years to recover.
Centuries later, this same process was repeated when Lenin created a totalitarian state organized around a predatory caste, which led to an unprecedented plunder of the Russian population - a practice that continued under Stalin. Vladimir Putin is part of this same legacy. With the invasion of Ukraine, he plunged the country into a devastation that is becoming increasingly difficult to hide.
He seeks power that is not limited by anything and no one, operating in a framework of complete impunity, where he can do whatever he wants. This has led to the establishment of a supposedly omnipotent power structure. Those who serve it have access to privileges such as high positions in the regime or lucrative public contracts. Conversely, those who fall out of favor with the leader are eliminated or fall involuntarily from windows - a well-known problem in Russia.
L'EXPRESS: Of all the tyrants, which one is Putin most like?
FRANCOISE TOM: Although he has a number of similarities with several of them, I think he is much closer to Stalin. Like Stalin, he sees himself as a "unifier of the Russian lands" whose mission is to restore the empire. We see that Putin has adopted many of Stalin's methods. This is especially evident in Ukraine, in his attempts to subjugate the conquered population.
The deployment of the FSB, the use of terror and the elimination of local elites are all methods that Stalin used in Poland, Czechoslovakia and other countries supposedly liberated by the Red Army. And Rosgvardia, the Russian national guard created by Putin in 2016, has become an instrument for controlling the occupied territories, similar to Stalin's SMERSH.
L'EXPRESS: While Putin thought he would win the war against Ukraine in a matter of days, it is already entering its fourth year. If he has strayed so far from the path, you explain, it is because he has been "a victim of the mechanisms of the system that he himself created, just like other autocrats on the Russian throne before him". Who are they?
FRANCOISE TOM: The vertical structure of power established by Putin has led him to be surrounded only by courtiers who tell him what he wants to hear. And that is the great weakness of this type of regime, which lives in a bubble, far from reality. In the case of Ukraine, his intelligence services assured him that 70% of the population supports Moscow. Therefore, Putin believed that his tanks would be greeted with flowers by the people and that a pro-Russian uprising would quickly follow.
The reality was quite different. And this phenomenon is far from gone. Many indicators suggest that the reports he receives from the military are greatly exaggerated. As recently as November, the chief of the Russian General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, triumphantly declared that Russia had captured the city of Kupyansk. Yet, just over two weeks later, President Zelensky was seen there visiting his troops. This discrepancy with reality is a real weakness of the Russian government.
However, it is compensated by an extraordinary tenacity in achieving its goals. Despite the huge losses in Ukraine, Moscow has not reduced its ambitions. This stems from the very nature of the regime established by Putin, which has an unprecedented track record of maintaining power. To this end, he is applying the lessons learned in the KGB to the letter.
L'EXPRESS: What does this mean?
FRANCOISE TOM: Putin is transforming KGB methods into a way of governing. Like the name he gave to his invasion of Ukraine, his policy boils down to a series of special operations. And it has been that way since the beginning. Three years after taking office, he had already neutralized the biggest oligarchs of the Boris Yeltsin era - Berezovsky and Gusinsky, to name a few.
Similarly, Khodorkovsky, whose control of the media he considered problematic for consolidating his power, fell shortly thereafter. All these purges are impeccably organized and disguised as legal procedures.
L'EXPRESS: Outside of Russia, as you note in your book, Moscow skillfully exploits the greed of its partners to achieve its goals. How exactly?
FRANCOISE TOM: The way Putin uses Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is, in my opinion, quite revealing. If there is one constant in Russian foreign policy since Bolshevism, it is the search for useful idiots in the Western camp who can serve its goals. Taking advantage of the greed, and sometimes even the sheer stupidity, of its interlocutors, Moscow chooses a docile partner. And that is exactly what is happening.
Initially, Trump appointed General Keith Kellogg to be in charge of Russian-Ukrainian relations. Putin, however, did not want him and preferred Steve Witkoff, a real estate developer whose understanding of the issues is more than limited and who generally looks very favorably on the possibility of doing business in Russia.
In fact, the possibility of doing business with Moscow seems to be the focus of attention in the United States today. In this respect, the Kremlin's maneuvers are in line with the purest Soviet tradition. This is exactly what Lenin did in the spring of 1918, presenting to the Germans the "fantastic" opportunities offered by economic cooperation with Russia.
In exchange for concessions for the exploitation of raw materials on Russian soil, Moscow demanded that Berlin - which was an ally of the Turks - prevent Ankara from seizing the oil wells in Baku, which Russia wanted to retain control of. And the Germans took the bait. The West was wrong to believe that the Russians were pursuing economic goals. In reality, economic instruments are used primarily as weapons to achieve political goals.
L'EXPRESS: In your opinion, the disastrous withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan directly contributed to Putin's decision to invade Ukraine. Why?
FRANCOISE TOM: When Putin witnessed the demonstration of weakness and incompetence demonstrated by the United States during the withdrawal from Afghanistan, he decided it was time to break the anthill. Any sign of weakness from the West only encourages the Kremlin to push even harder. Similarly, when Western leaders say they want to start a dialogue with Russia, Putin interprets this in terms of the balance of power.
His logic is this: if his opponents want to negotiate, it is because they are in a weak position and that this is the moment to take advantage of their advantage. In this way, instead of easing tensions with Moscow, they only fuel them. The more concessions we show the Kremlin that we are willing to make, the more it can demand of us.
L'EXPRESS: In fact, Russia does not seem to be really interested in the ongoing negotiations aimed at a peace agreement for Ukraine...
FRANCOISE TOM: Putin is absolutely not interested in these peace talks. He is simply misleading Trump to prevent the Americans from imposing stricter sanctions on Russia. His goal is to continue building his military influence while avoiding retaliation from the West. In this context, these talks are a simple way to buy time. They are also aimed at undermining Ukrainian morale by demonstrating that their American ally has betrayed them.
Even if a ceasefire agreement is reached, it will have no chance of lasting existence. The Russians will not give up their goal. The only thing that could really stop them is the collapse of the regime, as in 1917. This could be caused by growing internal economic difficulties or significant setbacks on the front line.
L'EXPRESS: Is the Russian regime really less stable than we think?
FRANCOISE TOM: History shows that one of the characteristics of Russian power is that beneath its apparent solidity, it is more fragile than we believe, and can quickly collapse. We saw a glimpse of this in 2023 during the rebellion of the former head of the Wagner Group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, when he launched an offensive towards Moscow, but stopped at the last moment.
The fact is that this type of authoritarian regime is only held together thanks to the vertical power structure created by the leader. But if something happens to him, he will be paralyzed.
L'EXPRESS: In your book, you dismiss the fears that the collapse of the Russian regime will lead to even greater chaos. Why?
FRANCOISE TOM: I think this is a misinterpretation by some Western countries. It is partly the result of the regime's disinformation. During the collapse of the USSR, Americans were horrified by the idea that Russian nuclear weapons would end up scattered all over the world. But this was a Russian psychological warfare tactic, designed to encourage the West to prevent the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In 1991, out of fear of chaos, the West tried to dissuade some Soviet republics from declaring independence. We see this same fear today, and it has very real consequences. Military aid to Ukraine was provided in very stages and often with restrictions on the terms of use of the equipment supplied, as if deep down some countries feared the consequences of a Russian defeat.
In reality, this fear of chaos in Russia is directly beneficial to maintaining the Russian autocracy.
L'EXPRESS: Many Europeans, especially the Baltic states, fear becoming Russia's next targets. Is Ukraine just the first step?
FRANCOISE TOM: Putin wants all of Ukraine, but his ambitions are not limited to this single country. His grandiose project behind this invasion is Russian hegemony over all of Europe. Ukraine must first and foremost serve as a springboard before moving on. In this context, taking control of the country would allow him to seize a host of assets, such as its defense industry, its military capabilities, and its human resources.
Russian hegemonic ambitions on the European continent date back to the Soviet era. As early as 1947, Stalin admitted to the French communist Maurice Thorez that the Red Army would have reached the English Channel if the Americans had not landed. And Stalin clung to this idea. Initially, he counted on the United States leaving Europe within six months of the end of the war and that he could then implement this plan.
In Stalin's mind, Europe was simply a small peninsula, destined to fall into the Russian sphere of influence as soon as the Americans left. The arguments that Stalin used at that time against the "Marshall" Plan and the creation of NATO were exactly the same as those used today against the common defense of the continent. The Russian maneuvers and their objectives remained unchanged.
L'EXPRESS: To achieve this hegemony in Europe, Moscow must destroy the "transatlantic bond" because, as you write, "detached from the United States, the European countries could be picked one after the other, like ripe fruit". Isn't Trump's presidency an unexpected gift?
FRANCOISE TOM: Absolutely, Russian leaders are delighted with the return of Donald Trump. They see him as the perfect wrecking ball against American power - the very power that has so far stood in their way. Donald Trump is destroying America's liberal order and alliances. He is now the weak link in the Western camp.
It is also interesting to note his astonishing consistency in favor of Moscow. Trump repeats Russian rhetoric like a parrot; Putin could not dream of anything better.
L'EXPRESS: In your book, you remind us that Vladislav Surkov, one of the Kremlin's leading ideologues, "claims that Putinism is completely exportable" and that the United States "seems to be on the path to self-Putinization". What do Trump and Putin have in common?
FRANCOISE TOM: They share a common contempt for international law and what I call social Darwinism. It’s the idea that only power matters and that it is above all other considerations, such as the rule of law. The parallels between Donald Trump’s second term and Putin’s early years in power are striking.
Like his Russian counterpart before him, the American president seems determined to subjugate the judiciary and increase his control over the media. He displays the same temptation to establish the vertical structure of power that exists in Russia today.
L'EXPRESS: How did Russia pave the way for Trump's rise to power?
FRANÇOISE TOM: It has encouraged the polarization of American society to the greatest extent. It began with social media, where Russia has invested heavily in troll farms designed to inflame public debate through disinformation. This contributed to the radicalization of groups of people who are now part of the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement.
Meanwhile, Russian media outlets such as Russia Today, which established a presence in the United States in 2005, encouraged the emergence of figures sympathetic to Moscow, some of whom were subsequently invited to American channels such as Fox News.
In this way, the Russians have been "working" on American society from both the top down and the bottom up for years. Party tensions have flared up so much that Trump was able to openly ask the Russians to find compromising information on Hillary Clinton in 2016 without causing much fuss.
L' EXPRESS: You say that Europe is also affected by these same forces "that we see operating across the Atlantic". How can one protect oneself from this risk of "self-Putinization"?
FRANCOISE TOM: Russia seeks to destroy our institutions by reducing the political life of our countries to extremism. However, it is impossible to govern a country polarized in this way. To protect ourselves from this, we must first recognize the symptoms.
For example, when Moscow organizes operations such as the pig heads found in front of a mosque in France, or the anti-Semitic graffiti depicting Stars of David on the facades of buildings in 2024 and 2025, it seems necessary to educate the population so that it can recognize these attempts at manipulation.