Thread on the origins of the narrative: "If Putin falls, the next one will be worse." This idea gained traction post-2014 amid Russia's actions in Ukraine. Here's a breakdown with early references. #Russia #Putin 🧵
1/5 The narrative emerged publicly in 2014, tied to Putin's brazen moves like the Crimea annexation. Earliest example: June 9, 2014, Russia expert David Kramer (ex-US Asst. Sec. of State) argued a successor to Putin is "likely to be worse," noting democratization was unlikely.
2/5 This was in discussions on Russia's future during Ukraine tensions. Kramer highlighted risks of a more unstable or aggressive leader replacing Putin.
3/5 A deeper dive came in Sept. 2014 with the article "Will Putin's Successor Be Worse?" in World Affairs Journal. It invoked "après moi, le déluge," suggesting Russians might stick with Putin's stability over a riskier nationalist successor, amid 2014's shifts.
4/5 By Nov. 2014, it spread to a Daily Beast piece: "Russians Know They Could Do Worse Than Putin." It warned the West that a successor could be more hardline or revanchist, directly linking to Putin's foreign policy that year.
5/5 The theme has evolved but originated in these 2014 contexts during the Ukraine crisis. It's persisted in analyses since. Sources above for details.
6/5 It seems that the thinking about this evolves and younger, less Soviet oriented group can eventually emerge. It’s actually already exists.
While not wholeheartedly embracing democracy it recognizes the Economic and human cost of putin’s stubborn and outdated imperialism.
More to come 😉
While not wholeheartedly embracing democracy it recognizes the Economic and human cost of putin’s stubborn and outdated imperialism.
More to come 😉
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
