Kamil Galeev Profile picture
Jun 24, 2023 35 tweets 10 min read Read on X
What is happening in Russia?

The mutiny is real. It is also unlikely to succeed. Most probable outcome is:

1. The mutiny fails
2. The regime stands (for a few months)
3. Upon its suppression, regime becomes increasingly dysfunctional -> falls

In other words, Kornilov putsch🧵
Let's start with the "real" part. A sizeable force of Wagner troops have left their positions in East Ukraine and entered the Russian region of Rostov Oblast. This is a real mutiny
It is also likely to fail. Not because there is few of them, but rather because they are far away

Russia is a hypercentralised country. Control over Moscow is the only thing that matters. And it is unlikely these fellows will be able to reach it, let alone occupy it
Moscow is just too far away. Even if you leave all the heavy equipment behind, successfully transporting thousands of troops over >1000 km will be almost impossible

What you most probably gonna get is a mammoth traffic jam = a target for the airforce
Unless something radical happens in the next 12 hours, I bet on the regime surviving through this incident. Control over Moscow is the only thing that matters, and it is unlikely the mutineers will be able to assume it by this point. Too far

Again, if nothing radical happens
Still, even if this mutiny fails (as it probably will), it is likely to have the most detrimental effect on the Russian war efforts and thus on the regime's viability. If I were to find a metaphor to describe it, I would frame Prigozhin's mutiny as a modern Kornilov Rebellion
Now who is Prigozhin? He is first and foremost a junior member of the St Petersburg gang. With the rise of Putin, the gang members rose very high. Still, the initial status in the gang matters

Prigozhin wasn't a Putin's man. He was a Rotenberg's man. The vassal of a vassal
I can neither confirm, nor deny that in the late Soviet era Rotenberg brothers had a side hustle of burgling the Leningrad antiquaries houses. Obviously, such a business could not prosper other then under the KGB patronage

You snitch + do the dirty job -> they let you to hustle
I can also neither confirm nor deny that such a hustle involved sacrificing some of the gang members from time to time. Some gang members have to be given to justice. But the Rotenbergs had a saying in who will be sacrificed

At some point they may have chosen Prigozhin
After being sentenced to 13 years and having spent 7 in jail, Prigozhin was released. Still, he got compensated. I can neither confirm nor deny his patrons helped him with launching a restaurant business

He was a junior, invaluable member of the gang, but a member nonetheless
In 1996, a patron of Prigozhin's patron got a job in Kremlin and started his meteoric rise. Once Putin succeeded into power in 2000, the membership in a gang became priceless. It gave a direct access to The First One, the Access to the Body as we say in Russia

Invaluable asset
That's what you should know on Prigozhin's personal profile

1. A junior member of the gang
2. Not a valuable member. Worthless enough to be sacrificed as a scapegoat
3. But a member nonetheless

So once the boss of his boss becomes the Tsar, Prigozhin becomes a courtier
Now on the Wagner group. An important thing about the Wagner group is its somewhat outcast-ish character. You obviously heard about the recruitment of prisoners

Its rank and file may indeed largely consist of criminal/semi-criminal folk or just rando folk who got in by accident
But Wagner commanders are *not* randos. They are most typically the army/special forces/much more rarely intelligence officers who have been kicked out, usually for crimes or gross misbehaviour. And then had to start their career anew
Consider this guy to the right of Putin. A special forces officer. In 2008 convicted for robbery & kidnapping. In 2013 released to joined Wagner

Many others were kicked out for minor offences But the pattern is typical. Wagner is your second chance, after you lost the first one
A typical Wagner commander's profile is:

- Trained officer with relevant military experience
- Selected out from the regular forces, for crimes, misbehaviour or just not fitting in
- But given a second chance in Wagner

You are supposed to be grateful to the system. Are you?
If you consider that the Wagner leadership consists of the former officers selected out by the system, the constant dick measuring contest with the regular army becomes a bit more understandable

It is very important to prove we are better, an not only for pragmatic purposes
The peculiar Wagner iconography with a focus on unhinged lawlessness makes more sense, too. I don't think it is all optimised for pragmatic purposes, like propaganda. Like, why would you choose this type of propaganda in the first place?
I think that the exaggerated and sometimes counterproductive focus on being far, far superior than the regular army may have something to with most of the Wagner leadership being selected out from the latter
Now on the consequences. Should the mutiny fail (as it probably will, unless some radical development follows today), it will have the most detrimental consequences for the Russian war efforts
Observers describe Wagner as a mercenary army. But the truth is: all of the Russian army is a mercenary army. Some of the file and rank were mobilised, some enlisted voluntarily. But the overwhelming majority has no positive motivation to stay in the trenches except for salary
Foreign observers who ascribe the tolerance of the Russian society to the war to the "propaganda" are clueless. The preaching ("propaganda") is not worth much. Incentives are worth everything. Putin is smarter than foreign observers, so he is paying soldiers exorbitant salaries
"Beliefs move actions" causality is overrated

More often than not, it's the other way around. Incentives move actions and actions move beliefs. You do as you are incentivised to and then you rationalise why it was amazing thing to do in the first place

That's how it should be
Putin knows that and pays soldiers exorbitant salaries they would never ever earn as civilians

BUT

The more you earn, the less incentive you have to stay in the trenches. It's like playing with casino. At some point you better collect your winnings and leave
190 000 rubles a month may sound as a great deal at first. Which they probably are. But the longer you stay in trenches, the less likely you are to have a chance to spend what you have already earned

The mercenary army is getting tired quickly
Add here very little rotation and no realistic prospect of demobilisation until the war is over and what you get is the extreme tiredness. While being in defensive may be advantageous strategy-wise, it has a horrible effect on the Russian army morale, just as it always did
It is not impossible that the current situation would not even arise, if not for the Ukrainian counteroffensive. With the pressure applied some links of the chain can break (as they did)
Now about the consequences. Should the mutiny fail (as it probably will) what will follow is the decrease in trust and quite plausibly purges against the real and supposed disloyals
Much of the army's rank and file may be of questionable loyalty. They won't uprise, but they may not lift the finger for the regime either. Same goes for much of the warrior cops, etc. Even if they are loyal to the regime, the latter can't be sure
If I were to name one single institution that the regime may rely on the most, I would name not the FSB, but rather the FSO. Not the Federal Security Service but the Federal Protective Service. The outsized service of the bodyguards
We are all used to thinking of the FSB as of the modern Russian nobility. But if you look at the ministerial or gubernatorial appointees of the last decade, you will notice a rapidly rising share of the FSO officers

Putin's personal bodyguards becoming governors basically
Underestimation of the FSO role may have something to do with us always framing Russia in Soviet terms, always looking for the Soviet parallels and allusions

I would argue however, that modern Russia is much more of a cosplay of the Holstein-Gottorp empire than most would admit
Our focus on the FSB and FSB alone may largely result from our refusal to think about Russia otherwise than in Soviet terms. FSB-KGB-NKVD. We focus on the FSB and only because we have a Soviet parallel for it

We don't really have a Soviet parallel for the FSO. So we ignore it
But we do find such a parallel in the Russian Empire. The best way to think about the modern FSO is to frame it as a cosplay of the Transfiguration Regiment. At least that is where it has been evolving through the late Putin's era. The rule by the Imperial Guard
If trusted with guarding the emperor's sacred body, you can be trusted with anything (like ruling a province). And when it comes to putting down the internal revolt, it is probably not the FSB that constitutes the last line of defense. It is probably the FSO regiments

The end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kamil Galeev

Kamil Galeev Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kamilkazani

Sep 7
Yes, and that is super duper quadruper important to understand

Koreans are poor (don't have an empire) and, therefore, must do productive work to earn their living. So, if the Americans want to learn how to do anything productive they must learn it from Koreans etc
There is this stupid idea that the ultra high level of life and consumption in the United States has something to do with their productivity. That is of course a complete sham. An average American doesn't do anything useful or important to justify (or earn!) his kingly lifestyle
The kingly lifestyle of an average American is not based on his "productivity" (what a BS, lol) but on the global empire Americans are holding currently. Part of the imperial dynamics being, all the actually useful work, all the material production is getting outsourced abroad
Read 8 tweets
Sep 1
Reading Tess of the d'Urbervilles. Set in southwest England, somewhere in the late 1800s. And the first thing you need to know is that Tess is bilingual. He speaks a local dialect she learnt at home, and the standard English she picked at school from a London-trained teacher
So, basically, "normal" language doesn't come out of nowhere. Under the normal conditions, people on the ground speak all the incomprehensible patois, wildly different from each other

"Regular", "correct" English is the creation of state
So, basically, the state chooses a standard (usually, based on one of the dialects), cleanses it a bit, and then shoves down everyone's throats via the standardized education

Purely artificial construct, of a super mega state that really appeared only by the late 1800s
Read 10 tweets
Aug 9
There's a subtle point here that 99,999% of Western commentariat is missing. Like, totally blind to. And that point is:

Building a huuuuuuuuuuge dam (or steel plant, or whatever) has been EVERYONE's plan of development. Like absolutely every developing country, no exceptions Image
Almost everyone who tried to develop did it in a USSR-ish way, via prestige projects. Build a dam. A steel plant. A huge plant. And then an even bigger one

And then you run out of money, and it all goes bust and all you have is postapocalyptic ruins for the kids to play in
If China did not go bust, in a way like almost every development project from the USSR to South Asia did, that probably means that you guys are wrong about China. Like totally wrong

What you describe is not China but the USSR, and its copies & emulations elsewhere
Read 7 tweets
Jul 7
Victory has a hundred fathers, defeat is an orphan

Everyone is trying to appropriate the rise of China for their own purposes, like it proves their theory, ideology whatever

No one, however, wants to appropriate the post-Soviets, who, by the way, also made capitalist reforms
What I am saying is that "capitalist reforms" are a buzzword devoid of any actual meaning, and a buzzword that obfuscated rather than explains. Specifically, it is fusing radically different policies taken under the radically different circumstances (and timing!) into one - purely for ideological purposes
It can be argued, for example, that starting from the 1980s, China has undertaken massive socialist reforms, specifically in infrastructure, and in basic (mother) industries, such as steel, petrochemical and chemical and, of course, power

That was almost entirely state's job
Read 4 tweets
Jul 1
The primary weakness of this argument is that being true, historically speaking, it is just false in the context of American politics where the “communism” label has been so over-used (and misapplied) that it lost all of its former power:

“We want X”
“No, that is communism”
“We want communism”
Basically, when you use a label like “communism” as a deus ex machina winning you every argument, you simultaneously re-define its meaning. And when you use it to beat off every popular socio economic demand (e.g. universal healthcare), you re-define communism as a synthesis of all the popular socio economic demands
Historical communism = forced industrial development in a poor, predominantly agrarian country, funded through expropriation of the peasantry

(With the most disastrous economic and humanitarian consequences)

So, yes, living under the actual communism sucks
Read 5 tweets
Jun 28
Some thoughts on Zohran Mamdani’s victory

Many are trying to explain his success with some accidental factors such as his “personal charisma”, Cuomo's weakness etc

Still, I think there may be some fundamental factors here. A longue durée shift, and a very profound one Image
1. Public outrage does not work anymore

If you look at Zohran, he is calm, constructive, and rarely raises his voice. I think one thing that Mamdani - but almost no one else in the American political space is getting - is that the public is getting tired of the outrage
Outrage, anger, righteous indignation have all been the primary drivers of American politics for quite a while

For a while, this tactics worked

Indeed, when everyone around is polite, and soft (and insincere), freaking out was a smart thing to do. It could help you get noticed
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(