In the evening of February 25, rumors began to spread regarding the possible death of Strelkov-Ghirkin. And although there is no confirmation, in my opinion, it is too early for relatives and acquaintances of this terrorist to relax. And here’s why.
Putin is changing the concept of government from an autocrat president to an “autocrat”. Seemingly small, but fundamental differences that can be described by three groups of theses.
The first is relations with elites. The autocrat president in the Russian Federation played the role of a kind of arbiter-moderator in the war of clans. The arbitrator is the one who can listen to the arguments of the parties and find some kind of compromise in the “Kremlin towers” disputes. A moderator is someone who encourages the same war so that no clan gets the full set of resources sufficient to seize and hold power. That is, the “towers of the Kremlin” can fight to strengthen their positions, but in any case they have the opportunity to turn to a mediator to end the conflict, taking into account their interests.
A typical example of “mercy” might be observed on the example of Yavlinskyi
The autocrat format is different. The “towers of the Kremlin” no longer turn to the mediator, but ask for the favor/protection of the one who is above the conflict. And here there may be no compromise – instead it will be “the will of the king”.
The second is the demand for elite loyalty. Both groups and their individual representatives. After all, an autocrat can “execute and pardon.” Moreover, the latter is possible only under the condition of loyalty, control and gratitude. A typical example of “mercy” might be observed on the example of Yavlinskyi. The oppositionist asked “whether it is possible to go to the elections and criticize the tsar”, received the answer “no”, said “thank you”.
Violation of the loyalty-controllability-gratitude balance can lead to death. Let’s take Prigozhin. He was loyal to Putin to the end (let me remind you that the march to Moscow was not once morest Putin), but he became ungovernable – he died.
Navalny was already controlled (relatively), but not loyal. Die.
Blogger “Murza” (by the way, one of the most talented Russian propagandists and a successful “volunteer” for that side). Loyal to Putin, but not controlled (his channel survived the “Third Telegram War” when the Kremlin put the “warlords” under control) and only relatively controlled. Die.
The same applies to those whom the king considers a “traitor.” That is, people who publicly demonstrate their disloyalty and set an example for others. And here the case with the Russian pilot killed in Spain fits quite logically.
For Putin, fear, not love, comes first in communication with the population
The third – citizens or subjects – fear or (and) love. Regarding the population, the scheme has also changed. Earlier, Putin wanted to be loved first and then feared. A series of deaths changes the pattern. Citizens of the Russian Federation will naturally claim that each of the victims “died alone” or “it was an accident.” But alone with themselves, under the vodka in the kitchen, they will whisper “ubiiiilii…”. And to be afraid. To be afraid to show disloyalty.
Simply put, fear, not love, comes first for Putin in communication with the population. Although in Russia, paradoxically, fear breeds love. Let’s remember the Russian “hits, means loves”, “they are afraid, means they respect” etc.
In addition, autocracy is symbolism and… the autocrat’s fear for his future. After all, the king goes, as a rule, only to the grave. The reason can be either a palace coup (and here the execution of disloyal people from a close circle is quite a good demonstration of “power”) or a “Russian rebellion”.
But for the “Russian rebellion” (I’m not talking regarding the revolution) an important symbol is a strong personality. Nemtsov’s death (remember, it was a long time ago) showed that “a dead symbol will not work.”
It is quite logical that the next was the death of Prigozhin. After all, he is also a symbol – a symbol of “victory” once morest the background of army failures. Then Navalny. Let it be without structures, without influence (which was shown by weak performances even abroad, where Russian emigrants are definitely not in danger). But still a possible symbol.
The Russian pilot killed in Spain might also become a symbol
“Murza”, by the way, is a really effective Russian volunteer and propagandist – suicide (?). But he was also a symbol. Only as a symbol of the “warriors” who did not fall under the Kremlin at the end of 2023.
By the way, the Russian pilot killed in Spain might also become a symbol. Choose the right side and break out of the cesspool called Russia. This is not a political symbol, but an example at the grassroots level. And he was gone too.
And finally, Strelkov. Also a symbol. The symbol of the so-called Great Russian patriot. And this is dangerous, since Strelkov’s audience (and support) are radicals with combat experience. Who should Putin be afraid of?
And it was once morest this background that rumors spread regarding the death of the mentioned terrorist. It is quite possible that he is alive. But he will have little choice: either the Yavlinskyi case or a conditional loop. If, I repeat, the loop has not found a hero already today.
Thus, it can be argued that the king has already tried on the crown and is waiting for the coronation. The Russian tsar is capable of any savagery, since the traditions of “chivalry” were not observed in the Russian dynasty. Or rather, those who tried to demonstrate it ended badly.
Ihar Tyshkevich, political analyst of the Ukrainian Institute for the Future