Putin’s ‘macho doctrine’: Implications for Ukraine

The following article is an opinion and does not necessarily reflect those of of The Wizard of 'OZ' or 'OZ' - The 'Other' Side of the Rainbow

Putin, Russia’s macho modern-day tsar, just couldn’t live with Kyiv’s shameful infidelity – not after all that Moscow had done for Ukraine.

by Marwan Bishara
Senior political analyst at Al Jazeera. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin rides a horse near the Western Sayan Mountains in southern Siberia's Tuva region, August 15, 2007 [File: RIA Novosti/Kremlin via Reuters]

Vladimir Putin will have you know that he did not want this war; that it was imposed on him. He did the impossible to avoid invading his beloved Ukraine, but there are things that even a superpower, a super-duper patient leader cannot endure.

The Russian president has long warned that Ukraine belongs to Russia; if it could not have her, then nobody else could.

Alas, no one listened.

Neither he nor Russia had received the respect they deserved, and that was just unacceptable and utterly infuriating to this macho modern-day tsar.

By macho, I am not alluding to Putin’s ice swimming, judo fighting, and bare-chested horseback riding. But to his visceral assertiveness, willingness, and determination to use Russia’s military power to advance Russian interest.

Putin has made his views abundantly clear over the years, warning the West to end its geopolitical adventurism and keep away from Russia’s sphere of influence; to stop fishing and flirting with Ukraine, to no avail.

Uncharacteristically for a former KGB operative, Putin’s ominous speech on the eve of the Ukraine invasion was especially emotional, bitter and angry. The West was forcing his hand and he had no choice but to act before it was too late.

Putin could have endured the disappointment and the jealousy, but not the betrayal; Russia just could not live with Kyiv’s shameful infidelity. Not after a 300-year partnership, not after all that Moscow had done for Ukraine, endowing it with territory, money and prestige.

Worse, traitorous Ukraine had turned into a Western “springboard against Russia”. For Putin, Ukraine’s duplicity, the affection between Russia’s soulmate and its sworn archrival, was not just vulgar, it was dangerous for Russian national security.

Despite having made his peace with Ukraine’s desire for separation and grudgingly accepted joint custody of the twins, Luhansk and Donetsk, in 2014, he believed Kyiv continued to abuse the eastern provinces for the following eight years, providing him the pretext to intervene.

--more at Al Jazeera

Marwan Bishara
Senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.
Marwan Bishara is an author who writes extensively on global politics and is widely regarded as a leading authority on US foreign policy, the Middle East and international strategic affairs. He was previously a professor of International Relations at the American University of Paris.