"After Putin it will not be worse"

Alexandre Melnik (Moscow, 1958), a former Soviet and Russian diplomat at the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, has been a professor of Geopolitics for twenty years, an essayist, international lecturer and an analyst of the Ukrainian war in French media.

Thomas Osborne
Thomas Osborne
21 February 2023 Tuesday 21:24
18 Reads
"After Putin it will not be worse"

Alexandre Melnik (Moscow, 1958), a former Soviet and Russian diplomat at the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, has been a professor of Geopolitics for twenty years, an essayist, international lecturer and an analyst of the Ukrainian war in French media. Melnik thinks that Vladimir Putin "is rushing towards suicidal behavior" that is dragging his country down, but points out that there could be a legal way out, respecting the Russian Constitution. That solution would consist of removing him from power, as a consequence of the military defeat, temporarily replacing him with the prime minister and calling elections. Putin himself became president with this formula.

What was your first impression of Putin's speech?

The hallucination of a mental patient haunted by the ghost of the West. He believes himself to be the savior of humanity, neither more nor less, but in my opinion he is rushing towards personal suicidal behavior.

You didn't talk about a way out of the conflict at all, right?

You know, when you're in a personal suicide process, you don't talk about reality. One crawls into the abyss. For me he is a suicide who leads his own country to suicide.

You often make a moral analysis of this war. He's very harsh about conscription into prisons or widows and mothers of fallen soldiers receiving fur coats...

There is a confrontation between two perceptions of life and death. That is why I always introduce moral categories. It is not just about geopolitics. It's the time for the truth. Each one must choose his field, to be able to live afterwards in peace with his conscience. Either we think that brutal force prevails in the world, which is the jungle, and for me the jungle is synonymous with war, or we think that man is born to be free, to control his life, and that is universalism, to create conditions for peace. We are therefore faced with that moral dilemma between life and death.

What is the deep explanation of this moral bankruptcy of Russia of which you speak?

Yes, you evoked my phrase that someone accepts or even encourages the death of a loved one in order to have a material reward, be it in the form of a fur coat or a Lada car. For me it is the moral shipwreck of an entire nation, of Russia, which completely upsets the hierarchy of values. My perception of things is very clear. Russia has been turned into a zombie, lobotomized and kidnapped by fear and lies by a man who is delirious. It is the delusion of a single man, like Hitler at one point in history. From the beginning I have compared them. For me Putin is a new Hitler, but from the 21st century, with some differences. Germany was tried and recognized his guilt. It is exactly what Russia should do after Putin.

Is a new Nuremberg trial necessary, then?

A new Nuremberg trial is more than necessary. It is essential. It is vital for Russia and also for the world because, I repeat, these are two perceptions of life and death. It is a new configuration of the world in which we and our children will live. The force of law must triumph over the law of force. The force of law must be embodied by a court.

As a geopolitical scientist, are you optimistic about Europe after this conflict?

While the heart beats in this life, which is a small parenthesis between birth and death, one must be optimistic. Optimism is the solution to survival. It is not necessary to take wishes for reality, but hope must guide our lives. I see a humiliating, clear, net and unconditional military defeat of Russia on the battlefield. Then the collapse of the Putin regime that unleashed this barbarism. For me it is linked. Russia must acknowledge her guilt, and that guilt must be recognized by the international community. And then you have to project yourself into the future and try to build peace. We are in that Tolstoy spirit of war and peace. We are in that existential conflict.

But Putin has also said that it is an existential war for Russia. Does this mean that he can do something crazy?

He is engaged, as I told you, in suicidal behavior. That is to say, that he precipitates his own death, whether it be political death or physical death, I don't know. In this deadly madness, of course, there is the alternative between death or totally irrational behavior that we have thought of from the beginning, the nuclear button. But it's all the more reason to stop this one-man delusion as quickly as possible. You have to get out of the precautionary principle. We are at the moment of truth, and that requires acceleration. But that I salute Biden's attitude, with his visit to Kyiv, which has mowed the grass under Putin's feet. For once the West, the United States, has been ahead of Putin. You don't have to be on the lookout but on the contrary, you have to be proactive.

Even if the war is not justified and is a crime, do you think that the West is also a bit guilty for going too far in NATO enlargement and other decisions?

I completely reject this fallacious thesis. It is an element of the Kremlin's lying propaganda. You can always blame yourself for things. The process to communism was never made, for example in 1991, when Russia was very open to doing it. Many mistakes were made, such as privatizations, in which Westerners, especially Americans, were heavily involved. But it is not the West that bears the responsibility for what happens in Russia. It is something endogenous, not exogenous. Above all, one must not fall into the trap of Western victimization because for many Russians, especially young people, who are connected and globalized, it is the West that embodies the values ​​of freedom, human dignity, the values ​​of simply happiness. of a full life. You must not forget that.

Do you see a democratic Russia feasible in the coming years or at least a Russia that respects the rule of law?

Everything is possible. After Russia's military defeat and Putin's removal from power –not his death, which I don't wish on anyone_, the law card must be played. He would like to remind his readers that the Russian Constitution exists. In this delirium that invades us, it is forgotten that there is a Constitution, written by the way by French jurists, in 1993, at the direct request of the then president, Boris Yeltsin, who wanted to build democracy and the market economy. It is written in the spirit of the V French Republic. In case of incapacity of the president to exercise his functions, he makes him prime minister. He exists too. He was in the front row during the speech. Few know him. His name is Mikhail Mishustin. It's amazing because he hasn't gotten wet in this kind of delusion about the war in Ukraine. He is a bit behind. It would be he who would become interim president of Russia and, according to the Constitution, would organize a presidential election in three months. I remind you that Putin came to power exactly like that. Yeltsin threw in the towel and it was Putin, who was prime minister, who assumed the interim presidency, with the consequences that we know of. What I advocate is the removal of Putin from his post as president, who today represents the greatest danger for the entire world, and then play the legal card and call elections, with the participation of the Russians who have gone abroad and who already voted with their feet.

And what will happen?

I don't know, but Navalny, whom many Russians consider a true hero, a true martyr, could win. Do not forget that the Russians love martyrs very much. But it could be anyone else. The worst has already happened. When they tell me that after Putin it will be even worse, I don't believe it. The worst is already here. The removal of Putin from his post and a presidential election according to the constitutional mechanism seems to me a likely scenario. There are quite a few people who think so.