?Is Putin rational? Yes, just like terrorists are rational. Before 9/11, many people perceived terrorists as crazy maniacs who waived AK-47s and RPGs over their heads, justifying their seemingly irrational deeds under their god’s name. However, now it is acknowledged by most of the people around the world that terrorists are rational because they pursue their specific political or religious goals with deliberate tactics. Just like the initial perceptions of “crazy terrorists,” Putin’s maneuver of occupying Crimea with “unidentified troops” was perceived irrational or too radical. Many individuals assumed the situation would be unraveled by the Western power’s efforts and Russia’s drawback in response to that. However, the situation was carried out in favor of pro-Russian Crimeans and Russia. Just a few days ago, Putin signed the pact annexing Crimea into the Russian Federation in response to the ballot with 93 percent of Crimeans backing the annexation.
?With the situation being directed in favor of Russia, many people are saying the true winner of the Ukraine-Crimea crisis is Vladimir Putin, who I would like to introduce as “The Prince.” I am not asserting that he is awesome or magnificent like a prince in medieval Europe, but saying he is a perfect example of Machiavellism. Do remember I am not praising or picking a side of a certain party of the current dispute in Eastern Europe. This is merely an explanation of how I believe the individual achieved his goal and how it is related to the 14th century’s Machiavellian pragmatism.
Niccolò Machiavelli was an Italian philosopher, historian, politician and a diplomat who had his base in Florence during the Renaissance period. Unlike his predecessors, Plato, Thomas More and others who asserted kings to be philosopher kings with virtue and righteousness, Machiavelli is famous for his pragmatism that tolerated some degree of immorality if it was aimed at long-term stability of the state. During his time, 14th and 15th century Europe was in a very volatile situation in which no one ever knew which neighboring city-state would invade the others. In his book, “The Prince,” Machiavelli asserted a good ruler should not only imitate preceding great rulers and seek advice when it is needed but also dedicate himself to the art of war and maintain power by all means—not to mention eliminating or assassinating potential threats such as political dissidents and rivals. Furthermore, Machiavelli said that a good ruler should be capable of entertaining people or leaving them in awe so they could be distracted from crucial issues that may interrupt the ruler’s plans.
Many people say that Machiavelli’s advice that an efficient leader should maintain effective military capability (art of war) is an anachronism in the modern world. They say by possessing heavy military power, one will inevitably involve himself in an unneccesary war. This may be seen as true to certain people, especially for those who think deploying our forces overseas means we are being too greedy. However, Vladimir Putin evidently practices Machiavelli’s philosophy today.
Vladimir Putin, an ex-KGB agent, is a figure who maintains effective political and military power, fully under his control. Since 1990, Putin has been a president and a prime minister consistently. He was never out of power’s grasp. Plus, everybody tacitly agrees the incumbent prime minister of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, is a puppet of Putin’s. Medvedev almost always acts in accordance to Putin’s directions.
Furthermore, Putin is famous for displaying his strong masculinity to the public. One may have seen several pictures of him holding a weapon and a dead animal, or leading a horde of bike riders or even performing martial arts. In addition to other strong-look type behaviors, Putin aims to restore Mother Russia’s pride of the Cold War era, not to mention strengthen Russia’s military power. It looks like his tactics of raising his popularity and entertaining the people is working. Throughout all his presidential terms, he has maintained an approval rating of around 65 percent with the current one being approximately 67 percent.
Machiavelli describes that since the people are the origin of discordance and dissatisfaction within the state, it is important for a ruler to win people’s hearts and minds by entertaining them. Also, he asserts a ruler should have attributes of prudence and bestial features of both the lion and the fox. Prudence mentioned by Machiavelli means a pure risk assessment that will aid a ruler to avoid making stupid decisions prior to important moves. Bestial metaphors describes that since courageous lions cannot avoid snares and cunning fox cannot defeat wolves, a ruler should possess both features of boldness and cunningness in the same time to achieve his ultimate goal.
In Putin’s case with Crimea, all of Machiavelli’s requirements for a ruler to be a good ruler are applied. Putin was surely aware of the situation in Ukraine during the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics. He waited until his country could successfully finish the Olympics while winning people’s hearts and minds. He also waited until the Crimeans raised the issue of separatism amid the chaos in the capital of Ukraine. He acted boldly by projecting his strong military power to the region and did not create any crucial military conflict as a result. By deploying massive forces to Crimea and displaying Crimeans’ welcoming atmosphere in front of the world, Vladimir Putin not only successfully proved that Russia has some sort of “legitimacy” in the region but also showed that the Mother Russia is not out of the game. He proved to those who think the world is now a game-board only for China and the United States that Russia is capable of pursuing such bold moves with effective military power and is ready to do so again in a similar situation in the future.
Regardless of the Western power’s petitions and pressings, Putin won its long-term goal of proving its power, giving a call sign of Russia’s comeback to the world and annexing Crimea into the Russian Federation. Furthermore, more pro-Russian regions of Ukraine and other Eastern European states are projecting their implicit will of becoming a part of Mother Russia once again. Some people even say that this Crimean crisis is a call sign of Cold War II.
Virtue and righteousness presented by Thomas More and Plato are important. However, in such volatile situations, it seems it is hard to achieve triumph without a realistic, pragmatic approach. Unless an entity armed with virtue can leverage Russia and result the change in the situation, the Crimean crisis will only prove the victory of Machiavellism.
Do you agree we should take alarm to Putin’s success? Do you think he was successful? Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
