SOVA Center Director Alexander Verkhovsky says fearmongering about labor migrants has become Russian officialdom’s default rhetoric. He argues that recent anti-migration efforts presage a transformation of the official ideology.

Journalist Alexander Golts explains what Russia’s new Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile is, what danger it poses to Europe and why the current moment resembles the US-Soviet arms race in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Analyst Sergei Shelin says growing problems like inadequate army reserves, macroeconomic imbalances due to militarization and the indifference of Russians to conquests in Ukraine pose a dilemma for Putin, who increasingly faces a choice of substantially hardening his regime or pushing the pause button on the war.

Based on news reports and social media posts, journalist Timofei Panov of Republic talks about the privileges afforded to Russian government officials and politicians who sign up to serve in Ukraine.

Researcher Sofia Gavrilova examines the shift in narratives seen in the recent Georgian parliamentary election, especially around the issues of Russia and the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and explains why Georgia’s traditional victim identity might be changing.

Journalist Alexander Golts looks at recent changes to the system of compensation for wounded soldiers, arguing that they mark the first serious signal that the Kremlin’s resources to wage its war of aggression in Ukraine are drying up.

Historian Mikhail Suslov look at the variations in how Church leaders, intellectuals and activists talk about the war in Ukraine and explains why they do not speak in one voice.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov analyzes the latest personnel moves orchestrated by the Kremlin, with federal officials being appointed to governorships, which he sees as well thought out and effective.

Journalist Boris Grozovsky analyzes the results of the recent parliamentary election in Georgia, discusses the peculiarities of Georgian political culture and examines the mistakes of the opposition in the campaign. He paints a bleak picture of Georgia’s democratic backslide.

Political scientists Dima Kortukov and Julian Waller examine one of the latest instruments for indoctrinating of Russian youth: the videos accompanying a new, mandatory college course on Russian history.

Ahead of last Saturday’s parliament election in Georgia, Republic correspondent Maria Litvinova spoke with Georgians at competing “pro-European” and “pro-Russian” rallies in the capital of Tbilisi.

Sociologist Elena Koneva discuss the evolution of public opinion about Alexei Navalny during his political career and reflect on how he is remembered today. They also look at Yulia Navalnaya’s chances to break through in Russian politics.

Journalist Alexander Golts unpacks Vladimir Putin’s recently announced decision to change Russia’s nuclear doctrine, pointing out that even if it is merely part of the information war around Ukraine, it still cannot be ignored.

Political scientist Nikolay Mitrokhin details how, in violation of national and international legislation on the protection of children’s rights, the Russian and Ukrainian security services are increasingly using teenagers to carry out small-scale sabotage behind enemy lines, promising them easy money.

Journalist Alexander Golts looks at what Ukraine has accomplished in its Kursk raid and compares it with the operation of Brusilov and the Russian army in World War I, which, though brilliantly planned, ended up stalling due to a lack of reserves and material resources and ultimately led to exhaustion and political turmoil.

In an interview with independent researcher Maria Popova, political scientist Ilya Budraitskis discusses the origins and evolution of the ideology underpinning the political regime in Putin’s Russia.

Columnist and politician Boris Vishnevsky details recent amendments made to Russia’s law on preserving the memory of victims of political repression, which now lacks information about the number of those victims and facts about the repression.

Ukraine-based political expert Georgy Chizhov lays out his view that the recently adopted Ukrainian religion law, intended to sever ties between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church, will manage to live up to popular expectations.

Researcher Nikolay Mitrokhin looks at the recent law effectively banning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. He sees the allegations of its close ties with Russia to be unfounded, likely motivated by political and economic considerations, and lays out healthier scenarios for the unification of the Orthodox churches in Ukraine.

Political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky shares his thoughts on the strength of Vladimir Putin’s regime, the results of Ukraine’s incursion into Kursk, the prospects for peace talks and whether the Russian opposition abroad can make regime change in Russia happen.

Theologian Cyril Hovorun discusses the implications of a new Ukrainian law banning Russia-linked Orthodox Church in Ukraine and mentions other attempts to bring the two Orthodox churches in Ukraine closer to each other.

SOVA Center Director Alexander Verkhovsky looks at the tightening of labor migration legislation in Russia, along with recent actions taken by authorities, and argues that the government is trying to control migration rather than restrict it. Still, this control has a clear ideological aspect and is exacerbating anti-migration sentiments.

Journalist Yuriy Marin looks at the complex and varied paths of Russians to the Olympics and points out that the Kremlin has mostly avoided the topic of Russian athletes’ “neutral” status.

In a chapter from his new book, political scientist Grigorii Golosov analyzes global cases of the fight for independence, as well as the collapse of the USSR and decentralization processes in Russia in the 1990s, and comes to the conclusion that today’s Russia is not at risk of meeting the same fate.

Researcher Lukas Wahden explores how the war in Ukraine has influenced Russia's Arctic policy, challenges the prevailing narrative of a China-Russia Arctic alliance, and examines the increasing role of non-Arctic states in Russia's Arctic ambitions.

Political scientist Alexander Morozov states that the fight against the onset of dictatorship in Russia has been lost, but points out that within the next decade a new generation of leaders will come to power and steer the country. For now, however, there is no end in sight to the war.

Political scientist Kirill Titaev explains why the rules and conditions in Russia’s prisons increase the likelihood of prisoners committing crimes and what could be done to reduce those risks.

Russian journalism specialist Ilya Yablokov describes how the Kremlin has molded the media into a reliable and effective tool for advancing its political aims.

Military analyst Alexander Golts argues that as Vladimir Putin’s strategy of using nuclear threats to deter the West from supplying weapons to Ukraine reaches the end of the road, nuclear escalation is becoming a disturbing reality.

Journalist Oleg Kashin responds to two recent articles in major Western publications giving credit to Russian Central Bank chief Elvira Nabiullina for the resilience of Vladimir Putin’s regime amid the war and Western sanctions. Kashin argues that it is not Nabiullina, but ill-conceived Western policy that should get the credit.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov looks at the Kremlin’s moves and strategy in the Ukrainian regions occupied and annexed by Russia and argues that another fight for the future of Ukraine is happening behind the front lines.

Political scientist Ekaterina Schulmann explains what the Kremlin’s main goal is, as well as what the recent government reshuffle was about. She also shares her outlook for the war in Ukraine.

Political scientist David Szakonyi looks at the ongoing crackdown against corrupt officials and offers an explanation for why the Kremlin is acting now.

SOVA Center Director Alexander Verkhovsky discusses the nationalist agenda in state policy, signs of the revival of right-wing radicalism as authoritarianism deepens, and the outlook for nationalism in a future democratic Russia.

Researchers Ksenia Luchenkо and Kirill Shamiev look at the increasing militarization of the Church since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In particular, top clergy and priests are actively shaping the perception that the war is not just morally acceptable but even sacred.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov looks at the reshuffle in the Russian government and among governors and explains why it reflects serious problems with the Kremlin’s personnel management.

Journalist Alexander Golts analyzes the unexpected reshuffle in the security bloc engineered by Putin after his inauguration. How effective can replacing the men directly responsible for the special military operation be?

Imagining Russia in 2032 on the tenth anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, writer and blogger Oleg Kashin paints a future that is neither bright nor bleak.

Military expert Alexander Golts writes that by categorically refusing any negotiations with the US on strategic stability, Russia is cutting the lines of communication between the two major nuclear powers, thereby increasing the likelihood of worst-case scenarios. A new statement by the Russian Ministry of Foreign affairs on the upcoming military exercises ordered by President Putin to “enhance the combat readiness of Russia’s non-strategic nuclear forces" in response to “provocative statements and threats” against Russia “from certain Western officials” sounds exactly like the escalation Golts warned about in his piece published on April 30.

Carnegie Center expert Temur Umarov looks at the political fallout from the recent terrorist attack in Moscow. The serious snag in relations between Moscow and Dushanbe is further prompting other Central Asian governments to rethink their approach to Russia and their own security.

Based on data collected by the SOVA Research Center, researcher Natalia Yudina looks at radical nationalism in Russia in recent years, in particular how it has been affected by anti-migrant policies and official rhetoric, the war in Ukraine and the recent terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall.

Political analyst Mikhail Vinogradov looks at the government’s response to the challenges that have popped up since Putin’s triumphant reelection – in particular, the horrific terrorist attack in Moscow and large-scale floods now affecting an increasing number of regions – and discusses the likelihood of major policy changes.

In an interview, sociologist Konstantin Gaaze explains why Putin’s current form of legitimacy is very costly for his regime and why the “successor” model no longer makes sense. He also examines the likelihood of a “thaw” and the prospects for the Russian opposition in exile.

Political analyst Konstantin Kalachev discusses why the Russian opposition has failed to win the sympathy of the majority of the country, cautions against illusions regarding Russians’ political preferences and explains his view that this term is Putin’s last.

Political researcher Nikolay Mitrokhin looks at a variety of nationalist ideas that have recently been put forward by Russia’s conservative ideologists, from the interpretation of the special military operation to radical changes in education, population policy and even the housing sector.

John Chrobak unveils the plans for an "American Village" in Russia, a haven for conservative Western expats disillusioned by liberal values, sparking debates on cultural and ideological migration.

Political scientist Kirill Shamiev explains why the equilibrium in the war is currently in Russia’s favor, what factors are working against Moscow and whether another round of mobilization will be announced in Russia, as well as what is holding up mobilization in Ukraine and foreign assistance for Kyiv.

In a chapter from his new book, political scientist Grigorii Golosov looks at the current political regime in Russia in comparative perspective and concludes that maintaining personalist power – either with Putin amid a significant change in his role or without Putin – is not realistic.

Journalist Sergey Shelin writes that opponents of the regime have been playing by the Kremlin’s rules for decades. He says they are fixated on elections – which have long turned into a pointless ritual – while they lack a positive agenda.

In the context of Russia’s widespread use of criminals to fight in Ukraine, journalist Alexander Goltz analyzes historical experience and concludes that convicts are not particularly effective on the battlefield.

Nikolai Petrov analyzes Vladimir Putin’s reelection for another six years and suggests that his reported sky-high public support hardly strengthens his power and might even weaken him in the coming years.

Belgorod residents live under constant shelling and increasingly frequent raids by pro-Ukrainian saboteurs. Republic spoke with several residents of the area where shops, pharmacies and businesses are closed and there is a shortage of food and essential goods.

In interview with Farida Kurbangaleeva, political scientist and visiting researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, Ilya Budraitskis discusses how the concept of the “Russian world” has changed over Putin’s administration, especially after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Ilya Kalinin identifies general discursive frames that organize particular relations between the president and the Russian Federation, Putin and Russia. He shows how these frameworks produce the effects which are determined specific social imagination and political unconscious.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov explores how Boris Nadezhdin’s run for president made possible public expression of anti-war sentiment, which had been harshly suppressed since the very beginning of the war. The all-powerful Kremlin, having gotten rid of prominent oppositionists, missed the threat from a weak “rival.”

Mark Episkopos writes about the Kremlin’s efforts to shape the optics surrounding Russia’s upcoming presidential election, reflecting on the government’s two-fold goal of generating near-unanimous public consensus behind Vladimir Putin and promoting a sense of domestic wartime unity.

Journalist Oleg Kashin reflects on Alexei Navalny’s public farewell, which hardly gives his supporters and other opponents of the regime any reason for hope. But the regime has nothing to look forward to, either.

Journalist Sergei Shelin notes that at Putin’s recent address to the Federal Assembly, the Russian president did not even mention the election coming up in two weeks; rather, his speech was a demonstration of undivided and unlimited power.

Ivan Grek reflects on the potential conditions of future peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, suggesting that the Istanbul agreements of 2022 can already provide significant insights into their content.

Political scientist Nikolay Mitrokhin sums up the two years of Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine. Neither side, the author concludes, has been able to achieve the goals set out by their political leadership, while the problems of personnel and weapons remain critical for both Moscow and Kyiv.

Journalist Alexander Golts reflects on why Ukrainian President Zelensky decided to dismiss his highly popular top commander, Valery Zaluzhny, drawing parallels with the firing of General Douglas MacArthur in the middle of the 20th century.

Mikhail Suslov writes about the effort to produce an ideology for Putin’s Russia. Unlike Marxism-Leninism, today’s project is not utopian – instead, it is focused on how to stay afloat in the present and resembles the official ideology in the 19th century.

Richard Sakwa explains why after three decades and all the hopes vested in a positive peace order after the end of the First Cold War in 1989, Europe is once again trapped in a more amorphous but no less dangerous Second Cold War.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov explores how Boris Nadezhdin’s run for president made possible public expression of anti-war sentiment, which had been harshly suppressed since the very beginning of the war. The all-powerful Kremlin, having gotten rid of prominent oppositionists, missed the threat from a weak “rival.”

In an interview with Farida Kurbangaleeva, political scientist Nikolai Petrov claims that Vladimir Putin’s position in the country has strengthened significantly since the beginning of the war, while the Russian elites have definitively lost their independence and become Putin’s hostages.

Political scientist Nikita Savin offers his view of what Putinism is, why the ghost of Vladimir Putin will hover over Russian politics for a long time, and what “neo-Putinism” – Putinism without Putin – might look like.

Journalist Gleb Cherkasov explores the unexpectedly active public support garnered by Boris Nadezhdin, who announced his intention to run for president with a platform of criticizing Vladimir Putin and opposing the war in Ukraine.

Political analyst Mikhail Vinogradov writes that two months before the presidential election, the Kremlin feels fully confident and is barely reacting to a buildup of problems – from protests to heating outages. This excessive confidence, however, may be a problem in itself.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov looks at what has driven local protests in Russia in recent years and argues that the Kremlin’s model of governing regions is failing, with the wave of local protests expected to grow.

SOVA Center Director Alexander Verkhovsky looks at attempts by liberals to build bridges with nationalists and explains why the war in Ukraine makes cooperation almost impossible.

In an interview, historian Mikhail Suslov claims that Putinism as a political and ideological model is greater than Putin himself. In Suslov’s view, it is a complete set of values and ideas about the world that are shared by a significant segment of the Russian population and attractive to many outside Russia too.

Journalist Alexander Golts explains why military experts have been wrong in their predictions about the Russia-Ukraine conflict. He sees mass mobilization and the entire Russian economy’s being put on a war footing as almost inevitable given the nature of the war.

Ilya Kalinin writes about the upcoming presidential election in Russia, breaking down the conceptual switcheroos and shifts accompanying talk about the topic. He claims it is no longer about falsification of election results, but the disappearance of the original meaning of the concept of election and their transformation into a fiction.

Writing on Russian Constitution Day, Andrei Kolesnikov examines the succession of constitutions from Soviet times to present, including Vladimir Putin’s 2020 amendments, and concludes that the authoritarianization of Russia’s current regime is no fault of its constitution.

Journalist Mikhail Fishman looks at Putin’s Ukraine policy over the past two decades and concludes that there is no chance for peace talks in the conceivable future. Indeed, we should expect Putin to double down on his war against Ukraine.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov looks at the protest movement of women demanding that their husbands who were mobilized in September 2022 be brought home. Ahead of the presidential elections, the Kremlin appears to have no easy way out of the situation.

Alexander Golts explains why today neither Russia nor Ukraine has the strategic initiative, why Russia has not yet been able to realize its advantage in manpower and what options Ukraine has to get out of the current impasse.

Journalist Oleg Kashin recalls the important events that link Vladimir Putin and Dagestan. The outbreak of anti-Israel violence in the region, he argues, came as an unpleasant surprise to the Kremlin and put on display its inability to deal with challenges that are outside the box.

Based on years of polling and research, Alexei Levinson of the Levada Center explains why public approval of Putin has remained high for almost a quarter of a century and under what circumstances it jumps to 80% or higher.

Political scientist Nikolai Petrov breaks down the large-scale “de-privatization” that is being carried out by Russian courts, as well as through other methods. The threat of being stripped of property is intended to make business pliable, while the Kremlin also wants to decide for itself who can be entrusted with managing major assets.

Political analyst Mikhail Vinogradov looks at how Russia’s relations with the former Soviet republics have changed amid the crises of recent years, including the clashes in Nagorno-Karabakh, the incorporation of Crimea and the war with Georgia, and how these relations have been changed by Moscow’s current focus on Ukraine.

Military expert Alexander Golts analyzes Putin's latest nuclear threats in the context of Russia's suspension of participation in the New START Treaty. In his view, Moscow is making a resumption of negotiations on nuclear weapons contingent on the US ending support for Kyiv.

On the 30th anniversary of the violent clash between President Yeltsin and the then-parliament, Andrei Kolesnikov argues that the leaders of the Supreme Soviet and the current regime are united by a desire to move backward historically

Arkady Dubnov writes about the latest act in the Armenian drama, with Azerbaijan taking Nagorno-Karabakh by force, the Russian government barely concealing its desire to get rid of Armenia’s leader and Russian peacekeepers acting essentially in Baku’s interests.

Alexander Golts writes about the prospects for cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang in the field of arms and whether Russia can go back on the UN Security Council obligations it has signed on to.

Grigory Ioffe criticizes the West’s policy toward Belarus for being reduced to punitive measures. He argues that by ignoring the signals sent by Alexander Lukashenka, the West is losing the opportunity to influence Belarus and pushing it instead ever closer to Russia.

Philippe Lemoine revisits the debate about whether the West promised Russia not to expand NATO. He argues that the Russians have a good case that assurances made at the end of the Cold War ruled out NATO expansion to Central and Eastern Europe, but that it is not the case people who defend that view usually make.

Sergey Zenkin writes about Alexei Navalny’s angry appeal in which he condemns everyone, from leadership to media and business tycoons, who in the 1990s let slip the chance to implement democratic reforms in Russia. In particular, he explains why Navalny’s manifesto has been misunderstood by the Russian intelligentsia.

Yuriy Marin on how relations between Ukrainian and Russian athletes have evolved since Russia's 2022 invasion and how Ukrainian sport bureaucrats have gotten involved.

Sergey Ivanov looks at how the compilers of the single, obligatory school textbook build their narrative. Their inability to formulate a coherent view toward the past is a symptom of the regime’s inability to offer society any kind of coherent ideology.

Mikhail Vinogradov lays out scenarios for the 2024 Russian presidential elections. Getting Vladimir Putin reelected to a new term, it would seem, should not be difficult, but risks exist and should not be underestimated.

Ben Noble writes about the Russian Presidential Administration’s plan to place a moratorium on the adoption of unpopular initiatives in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election. What does this tell us about Russian politics?

Aleksandr Golts writes that the new laws tightening the rules for conscription and formation of the mobilization reserve entail the creation of a Soviet-style mass mobilization army in Russia, though this will require the restructuring of industry and a reversion to a planned economy and autarky.

Grigory Ioffe questions the rationale of Western policy toward Belarus, which is undermining its economic foundations and putting into question its survival as an independent state, thereby leading to total dependence on Russia.

Susanne Wengle writes that by keeping Ukrainian grain away from world markets Russia is harming Ukraine’s economy and holding hostage poor families across the world. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the key figure in the original grain deal, is the most likely broker of its renewal.

Nikolay Mitrokhin analyzes the situation in the Russia-Ukraine War as of mid-July. Why did the Ukrainian offensive, talked up for six months and launched in early June, almost immediately come to naught? Might Ukrainian society now reevaluate what is achievable in the war?

Grigorii Golosov explains what makes Russia different from other countries that went through democratization and what hindered the emergence of players that could oppose the country sliding toward autocracy.

Alexander Golts analyzes the outlook for the Russian war in Ukraine, comparing it to the Korean War, in which both sides spent enormous resources but were forced to return to the pre-war status quo. In the Russia-Ukraine conflict, there is still a long way to go before the strategic impasse is recognized by both sides.

Kirill Titaev describes mechanism that the Russian law enforcement system has recently been using to criminally prosecute political opponents. Previously, these tools were used by predatory law-enforcers in frameup cases against business entrepreneurs.

Nikolay Mitrokhin describes the developments at the front since the beginning of June and expresses cautious doubt that Western supplies of more powerful and effective weapons will help Ukraine defeat Russia militarily and liberate Ukrainian territories from occupation. Perhaps, it is time to look for other solutions to the crisis?

Grigorii Golosov discusses the aims of and fallout from Yevgeny Prigozhin’s rebellion, why Putin could not eliminate Prigozhin earlier, how public support looks in a “demobilization regime,” and the Putin-Lukashenko relationship.

Andrei Kolesnikov writes about the Kremlin’s fiscal policy, noting that the dragging-on of the “special military operation,” combined with the need to keep the population dependent on the state, will inevitably widen the budget deficit. Looking ahead, the budget could become militarized, and the integrity of the fiscal system is under threat.

Mikhail Vinogradov believes that the Prigozhin rebellion exposed serious problems with the administrative system, along with demands for changes coming from various social groups. However, it remains unclear whether decision-makers will show that lessons have been learned or pretend that nothing happened.

Oleg Kashin sees the reason for Prigozhin's revolt in the fact that with the advent of his "private military company" in Russia, for the first time in a hundred years a powerful military entity free from political control emerged. The revolt looks set to lead to the final disappearance of moral foundations in relations between the state and society.

Caress Schenk and al. explore how the host governments balance their countries’ geopolitical priorities and public perceptions of the Russian migrants through a combination of rhetoric, policy, and (non-)regulation.

Ivan Grek sees Prigozhin's revolt as an exercise in power balancing in a feudal-like system. This approach reveals intriguing historical analogies that provide a deeper understanding of the power dynamics currently at play in Russia and what lies ahead.

Andrei Kolesnikov reflects on the current state of the Putin regime, the Russian elite, and systemic liberals in government, as well as the possibility of civil war in Russia. In his opinion, the prevailing scenario in post-Putin Russia will be an exceedingly difficult, but relatively peaceful transition to normalcy.

Oleg Kashin writes about the inherent flaws in the current anti-Western nation-building project in Russia: proclaiming conservatism and distinctiveness, this project reproduces Western values and practices, only from 60 or 70 years ago.

Ivan Kurilla writes on the evolution of Russian-American relations in the 1990s. At that time, there was still no large-scale anti-American propaganda in Russia, but anti-American sentiment was already fomenting.

Sergei Shelin writes that most Russians’ acceptance of the current war is based not on fear of the regime or faith in the dictator, but rather on core values shared by the bottom and top of society. Thus, much less impressive are the attempts to use this consensus for the ideologization of education.

Nikolay Mitrokhin believes that the Kakhovka Dam was blown up by Russian forces to thwart the Ukrainian counteroffensive plan, yet the left bank of the Dnieper will likely still see new Ukrainian attacks.

Maxim Krupskiy writes about how an existential threat narrative towards “foreign agents” is formed in Russia, explains how it relates to the new Concept of Russian Foreign Policy and what goals the Putin's regime is trying to achieve by expanding the “foreign agents” legislation.

Mikhail Vinogradov writes that, although the drone strikes on Russian territory and Ukrainian forays into border regions have generally not perturbed Russians, these and other developments from May and early June raise serious questions that the Kremlin will have to answer in the near future.

Nikolay Mitrokhin writes that Ukraine’s recent foray into Russian territory aims to divert manpower and equipment from the main theater of war and create an image of Russians leading the attack. The Russian volunteers who were involved are far-right extremists who fled Russia for Ukraine after committing serious violent crimes.

Ilya Kalinin looks at the issues that the Russian regime has encountered during the war with Ukraine and sees a paradoxical internal challenge that makes victory costlier for this power than defeat.

Andrei Aksenov talks about how a century ago, like now, people who disagreed with political changes in Russia or were threatened with repression fled en masse. They left in a hurry, leaving behind their things and affairs, overpaying for tickets out and hoping for a quick return.

Religion scholar Alexander Blekher discusses the transfer of The Trinity by Andrei Rublev, one of the most famous Russian icons, to the Russian Orthodox Church, comparing the Christian veneration of icons with divine objects in pagan cults.

Oleg Kashin responds to the groundswell of initiatives to end or temporarily stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict. He points out that direct contact between Zelensky and Putin is impossible and considers what else might be done.

Boris Knorre writes about how Church leaders and ordinary conservative clergy interpret the victory in the Great Patriotic War, combining the political with the mystical, and the secular Soviet with the pre-revolution Church.

Ilya Budraitskis writes that the Putin regime needs ideology not in the sense of a coherent worldview, but as a technology of domination that works as a set of performative practices.

Tatyana Stanovaya on what the presidential elections in March 2024 might look like amid the “special military operation,” whether Putin’s successor could take part in them and why friendship with the West is unlikely, even if Russia loses the war.

In his essay, Ilya Kalinin describes the political mythology of the 90s that was created by the Putin regime to legitimize itself. He shows how the various forms of civil conflict and war that characterized the decade became the disguised basis of a new political order.

Tatyana Rybakova explains why the Russian oligarchs do not resist Putin or the war: 20 years ago, when Putin’s power did not yet seem absolute, they were about to oppose him, but in the end backed down.

Mikhail Suslov takes us through the new Russian Foreign Policy Concept, its sources and component parts, and explains what it tells us about the Kremlin’s policy thinkers and their ideological journey.

Cyril Hovorun writes about the deepening of the conflict between the Orthodox Church of Ukraine and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (part of the Russian Orthodox Church), expressing regret that the two churches are in a mindset of fierce competition rather than dialogue.

Georgy Chizhov on how the conflict between the Orthodox churches of Ukraine developed over the last three decades, how the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate became a victim of Russia’s war in Ukraine, and how the scandal around the Kyiv Lavra will evolve.

In his essay, Ilya Kalinin talks about the lack of political imagination and the dangers of turning to the experience of world wars of the 20th century for explanatory models and arguments in decision-making on the current crisis.

Andrei Yakovlev believes that it is necessary to begin to develop a new socio-political and economic model for Russia after Putin. At this stage, we can talk about an expert-led analytical process featuring the participation of representatives of various elite and professional groups.

Ilya Venyavkin outlines the questions that structure the debates about the ideology of today’s Russia and also discusses the phenomenon of bottom-up 'ideological production' – how the people doing the fighting or actively supporting the war effort on the Russian side are incorporating the war into their picture of reality.

Sergei Shelin writes about profound material changes in Russia: the prosperity of the beneficiaries of militarization, the decline of the middle classes, and the steady restoration of late-Soviet domestic practices.

Natalia Yudina describes how law enforcement’s approach to dealing with the ultra-right in Russia is evolving, even as one of the goals of the “special military operation” was “denazification.”

Sergey Shelin writes that, though the number of Russian dead in Ukraine is already higher than the Afghan and Chechen wars, the Kremlin is not facing pressure to change course. Overall, in the short and medium term, Putin has no reason to worry about problems arising back home.

Andrei Kolesnikov believes that in post-Putin Russia, a softening of the regime is more likely than even worse, fascist-like figures coming to power. He thinks there is no need to fear the future when Russia is hurtling into the past before our eyes.

Alexander Kynev writes about the changes that have taken place in the Russian political landscape since the “special military operation” started a year ago: local politics has been put on the back burner, parties are on the decline, civil society is in shambles and opposition media is trying to reach Russians while in exile.

Mikhail Vinogradov claims that there is a gap between the radicalness of official rhetoric and more moderate attitudes within Russian society and the establishment as a whole, and outlines scenarios for the war moving forward.

Ilya Kalinin suggests that in recent years the structural core of Russian policy, both foreign and domestic, is the historical past. The war has become a continuation of this policy, driven by the historical ambitions of the Russian leadership and its conception of the past.

Gleb Pavlovsky, one of Russia's most brilliant political thinkers, has passed away at age 71. Here is his latest piece for Russia.Post from November 1, 2022.

Nikolay Mitrokhin takes us through the key events in the conflict. He expects the resources on both sides to be depleted within a year, leading to a final stabilization of the front and possibly a truce.

Sergey Mikhailov writes about the way politicians who crafted Minsk agreements are clarifying their own position and the meaning of the agreements in retrospect and argues that Angela Merkel and François Hollande chose not to notice the agreements were essentially unworkable.

Sergei Shelin writes about the systemic liberals, who for 30 years have represented the “human face” of the Russian bureaucracy before suffering a moral and ideological meltdown in 2022. However, their competence remains beyond question: while Putin’s generals were losing battles, the “syslibs” loyal to Putin saved the Russian economy from collapse.

Andrei Kolesnikov writes that since the outbreak of the war active support for the regime has come to imply cheering on cruelty, primitiveness and immorality. The value of human life has been reduced to the willingness to risk one’s life for Putin and his inner circle.

Ilya Budraitskis on how decolonization is being weaponized, why efforts to define what a “decolonization” program should look like are encountering serious obstacles, and why Russians need to figure it out for themselves.

Ilya Kalinin analyzes the arsenal of historical and mythological tools used by the Russian regime to justify its war against Ukraine and explains the essential flaw of the state narrative.

Lisa Gaufman traces some of the major elements of the Kremlin propaganda used to portray the war against Ukraine as legitimate and unify the nation. Among them associations with the Soviet victory in World war II, anti-western conspiracy theories and the "Gayropa" narrative.

Alexander Golts writes about the replacement of General Sergei Surovikin with Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov and highlights how 11 months after the start of the special military operation, Russia’s military-political leadership continues to experiment with how to manage it.

Mack Tubridy talked with the editor and co-founder of Groza, Leonid Spirin, about why independent student-led media is needed in Russia today.

Nikolai Petrov analyzes a recent meeting with senior government officials in which Putin lost his cool and some discussions were left off the transcript. The backdrop for the meeting was the deteriorating fiscal backdrop and the reshuffle in the command of the Russian military grouping in Ukraine.

Grigory Ioffe writes about the growing rupture between the new Belarusian diaspora and those who remain in the country, as well as the hopeless plight of Belarusian political prisoners.

Nikolai Petrov on how Yandex, Russia’s largest IT company, has managed to avoid being nationalized and who took part in splitting up its Russian and foreign businesses to save them.

Alexander Golts analyzes the statements of Defense Minister Shoigu and President Putin at the year-end Defense Ministry collegium meeting and argues that the ministry has its sights set on bringing back the “mass mobilization army,” which Russia abandoned under the Serdyukov reform of 2008-12.

Sergei Shelin writes about the absence in modern Russia of institutions, social practices and ideological complexes suitable for building a country free of great-power ambitions. Because of this, attempts to convince Russians that the Putin regime is harmful to their interests are doomed to failure.

Jules Sergei Fediunin explains why Russian warmongers get away with their angry criticism of the course of the war and the army’s poor performance, even though a newly adopted law explicitly bans criticism of the Russian military.

Ilya Budraitskis writes that the "unbroken history" of the Russian state has been proclaimed as the foundation of an incontestable official ideology. This means that the past now poses an actual danger to the prevailing order and is under attack.

Maxim Blant explains why, contrary to expectations, the unprecedented international sanctions that have been ramped up in proportion to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine haven’t wrecked the Russian economy or consumer market.

Mack Tubridy examines the impact of the war on Georgia-Russia relations and questions whether everyday attitudes of Georgian citizens toward Russians who fled war are as hostile as some media reports suggest.

Giorgi Masalkini analyzes the reaction of Georgian society to the influx of Russian emigrants and explains why Georgia's stance on the war in Ukraine often looks inconsistent and wavering.

Nikolai Petrov analyzes a series of triumphant interviews by the leadership of the Federal Customs Service and explains how the Russian financial and economic machine, along with propaganda, is operating amid the tightening Western sanctions.

Ivan Kurilla on why the overuse of references to World War II to justify Russia’s war in Ukraine risks destroying what has been the main glue of Russian society and the consensus on which the regime relies.

Ben Noble looks at the State Duma’s activities aimed at managing the appearance of national consensus, and finds difficulties facing the authorities as a result of elite disagreements regarding the war on Ukraine.

Maxim Blant writes about why Gazprom's attempts to stage a "cold winter" in Europe haven’t been very successful. The company has had to slash production, while talk about reorienting supplies to the East have run into logistics problems.

Nikolai Mitrokhin gives an outlook for how the war will proceed from here and predicts that the Russian army won’t be able to win any major victories, while Kiyv has a chance to liberate the south of the country.

Mikhail Suslov discusses why Alexander Zinoviev, quoted by Putin at the last Valdai meeting, is best suited for the role of “official” philosopher of today's Russia.

Representatives of the Belarusian democratic opposition demand the withdrawal of the Russian army from Belarus, while official Minsk maintains that the Russian troops are needed to ensure the country’s security. Yan Auseyushkin writes about how this situation might affect the political crisis in the country.

Gleb Pavlovsky is the author of the "System RF” concept, which suggests that the Russian Federation dating back to 1991 is a unique state entity unlike any previous Russian statehoods. In this article he reflects on how the System might end.

Putin's October decrees introduced special regimes in certain regions, as well as new government bodies. Nikolai Petrov writes that they serve to deepen the process of replacing the constitution with a mixture of emergency measures and legal ambiguity.

Nikolai Petrov writes that the "partial" mobilization announced by Putin has demonstrated the administrative incompetence of the political regime in Russia. Jobs that require timely preparation and can’t be done through colossal cash injections are beyond its power.

Abbas Gallyamov believes that military failures in Ukraine, along with the huge price that the Russian economy is already paying for the war, will weaken Putin's position among both the ruling elite and ordinary voters. Who can succeed Putin?

Can the Russian regime manage the mobilization without further ramping up ideology and indoctrination? Marlene Laruelle discusses the different ideology options currently available to the Kremlin.

The combination of economic upheaval, international sanctions and some key policy development, David Szakonyi argues, is pushing corrupt officials to become more organized in how to abuse their public office and make off with the proceeds.

Based on his research, Andrei Yakovlev argues that in recent years the level of corruption has decreased at the lower and middle levels of the bureaucracy. This, in his view, represents a reason for the unexpected resilience of the Russian economy in the face of Western sanctions.

After a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive, “militarists” dissatisfied with the indecisiveness of the Kremlin have made themselves heard. Andrei Kolesnikov reflects on whether or not power could fall into the hands of the “party of war till the bitter end.”

In addition to government repression and the lack of organizational resources in society, Andrei Semenov writes that there is another factor that may explain the lack a public antiwar movement in Russia – the divide between two cultures of protest.

Mikhail Gorbachev delivered the world from the fear of a nuclear catastrophe and returned to humanity the human – the ability to think and feel free. At the same time, he believed to the last in the possibility of preserving the USSR and socialism, the destruction of which he is usually accused of, recalls political scientist Andrei Kolesnikov.

Putin’s Russia is taking an abrupt isolationist turn, seemingly breaking with over three centuries of Russian history when the West was a constant presence domestically. Maria Lipman considers the possibility of a self-contained Russia.

Over the six months of the Russia-Ukraine war, the idea has faded that Russia's military strategy can be pinned on Putin’s ill health or bad moods. Ivan Grek analyzes the plan behind Russia's invasion and argues that it was logical and well thought out. But there is one caveat.

Mikhail Vinogradov shares his observations on the actions of the authorities and the news flow in recent months, on Russia's relations with its neighbors and far-away countries, and trends in public perception.

Gleb Pavlovsky describes Russia as an improvising state in which process matters more than result. In the current context, the upshot is that while many conflicts have begun impromptu, the conclusion of war can’t be improvised.

Instead of a general mobilization to replenish the army fighting in Ukraine, “volunteer” battalions are being hastily formed across Russia’s regions. Nikolai Petrov believes this practice is based on plans for a long-term positional war.

Alexander Kynev cautions Russian oppositionists from joining coalitions with toxic figures. Such coalitions are likely to do more harm than good by leading to confrontation with a significant part of the internal Russian opposition rather than uniting it.

Uncover the role of 'voenkors', Russian military correspondents, in our feature 'Return of the Voenkor'. Discover their rising influence as critics of the regime while maintaining patriotism. Agnès Wenger on the rising popularity of Telegram channels belonging to military officers and military correspondents (voenkory).

Andrei Kolesnikov on the idea of banning Russians to travel to Europe and why that would be a flawed and damaging policy that would only encourage those who are already not pro-Western or pro-liberal to support Putin more.

In his previous article for Russia.Post, Abbas Gallyamov advised the Russian elites to seriously think about who the next Russian president should be. This time, he recommends that the West start considering a "Marshall Plan" for post-Putin Russia.

Contrary to expectations, no major decisions were taken at the extraordinary Duma meeting on July 15. Nikolai Petrov writes that Putin might have been forced to back down from plans to announce that the Donbas had been “liberated.”

Abbas Gallyamov believes that reelecting Putin in 2024 would be a serious challenge for the Kremlin. At the same time, Putin’s ideas are still shared by the electorate. In this context, a successor project along the lines of “Putinism without Putin” would help to preserve stability.

In his new book, Vladimir Gel’man analyzes why some countries are governed worse than others, focusing on contemporary Russia. Why is it governed so much worse than one would expect based on its level of socioeconomic development?

Nikolay Petrov looks at the impact of the war in Ukraine and Western sanctions on the Russian business and security elites. Any kind of a consolidated opposition to the Kremlin is very unlikely, he believes.

Tetyana Malyarenko and Stefan Wolff analyze the Russian “civil-military” administration in the occupied Ukrainian territories in the economic, cultural and socio-political spheres.

Abbas Gallyamov writes that the war in Ukraine is starting to disappear from the front pages and soon the economy, living standards and social problems will again be in the spotlight. This represents an opportunity to criticize Putin.

Marlene Laruelle and Kelian Sanz Pascual on the cinematic universe of the PMC Wagner and how pop culture frames are used to promote and celebrate a mercenary realm favorable to Russia.

Maria Lipman talks to Thomas de Waal, Senior Fellow Carnegie Europe, about whether Russia’s preoccupation with its war in Donbas creates new opportunities for a peace deal in the decades-long conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The amendments to Kazakhstan’s constitution proposed by President Tokayev may look like a move toward democratization, but Kirill Rogov warns not to be fooled – constitutional guarantees can be revised.

A Meduza interview with economist Andrei Yakovlev on the lack of turnover in Russia’s elites since the 1990s and the equilibrium between the security forces and business that has shaped the Russian regime.

Busygina and Filippov analyze the evolution of Russia’s relations with other former Soviet republics and the consequences of the Russian invasion in Ukraine, as well as the debate over whether the ultimate dissolution of the post-Soviet space is inevitable.

Evgeny Roshchin on why the institutional and non-institutional features of the current Russian regime may resemble the Nazi or Fascist regimes of the past, but are still not yet the same, and will probably never be.

Mikhail Pavlovets on how decoupling from the West is manifesting itself in the Russian education system and on Russia’s decision to withdraw from the Bologna system. How might that look in practice?

Andrey Kolesnikov identifies the elements of the government’s rhetoric accompanying the “special military operation” in Ukraine, explains the shift to undisguised imperialism in Putin’s discourse, and discusses the costs of the pursuit of imperial power

Julian G. Waller on the motivated misclassification of Russia’s political regime as ‘fascist’ and the need for a more serious scholarly conceptualization.

Georgiy Kasianov deconstructs this Russian propaganda cliché, discussing its building blocks and their historical origins, and explains the role of radical nationalist parties in Ukrainian politics

Botakoz Kassymbekova and Marlene Laruelle on how the myth of imperial innocence has ended for good with the Ukraine war. Russia’s century-old narrative of being an imperial savior, entangled with the sacred memory of World War II, will make any memory process particularly painful.

Mark Lipovetsky looks into the cultural roots of the current Russian mindset, as well as the key works and cultural figures who contributed to its evolution since the late Soviet decades and through the post-Soviet developments

Jean-François Ratelle looks at the challenges facing the prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Ukraine and cautions against expectations of a swift process.

A pro and con discussion between the Russian sociologist Greg Yudin and the German journalist Roland Bathon on the nature of the post-February 24 Russian regime.

The independent online magazine People of Baikal has published a long read about the funerals in Buryatia of soldiers who died in Ukraine.

Marlene Laruelle on how should we discuss the question of Russia’s collective responsibility and what are the comparative case studies to think of for generating a non-moralizing discussion.

Maria Engström on Russian conservative intellectuals' enthusiasm for the war and the idea that total isolation from the West will lead to a conservative revolution and a revival of national culture.