"There's a high likelihood": Vladlen Maraev discusses the potential for Russia's fourth collapse and its significance for Ukraine.

The scenario of the disintegration of Russia could indeed be realistic. However, this is unlikely to happen in the near term, which many of our compatriots hope for. This opinion was expressed in an interview with "Telegraph" by Vladlen Maraev, a candidate of historical sciences and co-author of the popular YouTube channel "History Without Myths".

In the second part of the interview, the historian discussed the metamorphoses of Putin, whether Russia is threatened by another disintegration and when it might happen, conspiracy theories regarding the supposed "betrayal" of Ukraine by the West, as well as the pros and cons of the loud project by historian Timothy Snyder.

*For insights on the hottest historical topics, some contemporary trends, and the rise of Ukrainian YouTube during the war, read the first part of the interview with the popular blogger.

You can watch the full video version of the interview with Vladlen Maraev on our YouTube channel.

On Putin's "absolutism"

— What are the chances that the dictatorship in Russia will be overthrown by other politicians, such as the Russian opposition?

— The real competitors of Putin have been gradually removed from the game, turned into his minions who merely play the role of extras in some "elections," or physically eliminated. Of course, this leads to irreversible changes in a person's psyche. That’s why power must constantly renew itself. The principle of holding elections every few years wasn’t just invented for fun. One person is prohibited from holding a position for a certain number of terms, one or two.

But in Russia, there are no restraining factors. A quarter of a century. Who has been at the helm of the country for a quarter of a century? For example, Stalin (even a bit more, in essence). But even Brezhnev was practically in charge of the state for only 18 years. Khrushchev – about 10 years. And here we have a quarter of a century.

Moreover, the person (Putin. — Ed.) is not young. He is indeed older than (some other politicians. — Ed.), and consequently, cognitive abilities are also, obviously, weakening. And his health isn’t improving either. It’s quite possible that his ideas will change to some extent. But he has never been favorable towards Ukraine. That’s for sure.

Let’s recall the history of the Tuzla Island. This was back in 2003, during Putin's first term. But even then, there was an attempt to use force. Attempts to intimidate Ukraine or simply push through a decision (about the annexation of the Ukrainian island to Russia. — Ed.) through purely hybrid methods. As if the central Russian authority had nothing to do with it. Allegedly, this step was not initiated from Moscow. It was claimed that it was just the local authorities of the Krasnodar Territory of Russia who were building a dam towards Ukraine.

On the fourth disintegration of Russia

— What other myths exist in Ukrainian society regarding Russia, Russians, and Putin? For instance, how mythical (utopian) or real is the thesis about the disintegration of the Russian Federation?

— Russia relies on the experience of the past. It has disintegrated before, not just once. Russia fell apart during the Time of Troubles in the early 17th century. It disintegrated after 1917. Finally, the Soviet Empire collapsed from the late 1980s to the early 90s.

Furthermore, there is historical evidence showing that all empires disintegrate (nothing lasts forever): from ancient Assyria to the British colonial empire. All of them, sooner or later, either broke apart, were destroyed by someone, or were reformatted in one way or another.

Therefore, this is a very likely event (the fourth disintegration of the Russian Federation. — Ed.). However, it is completely erroneous to hope that this will happen tomorrow. It would be utterly false to expect that Russians will organize something like our Revolution of Dignity because they lack such a tradition.

In Russia, there is no tradition of real mass struggle for rights and interests. They have a tradition of worshipping states and rulers, a tradition of strict subordination based on the principle of "I am the boss, you are a fool." There is a tradition of adoration for their ruler and fear of authority. Russians have a significant worldview tradition that power is cruel; it can always punish, etc. These are their traditions.

That’s why all the social protests of Russians and the "explosions" that occurred in the first days after the start of the [full-scale] invasion of Ukraine ended as we saw. The police arrested anyone they wanted, and that was it. Or when the Russian authorities announced mobilization. Yet still, Russians are afraid to protest and have not repeated such experiences so far.

There is another form of Russian protest – fleeing abroad. However, when Russians flee to other countries, they try to recreate Russia there: they speak their language everywhere and demand to be spoken to in Russian, even though they are guests; they often demand some special treatment for themselves; they often behave very arrogantly, pompously, etc.

On conspiracy theories and secret agreements without Ukraine

— Returning to the loud topic of "nuclear weapons", do you get the impression that Western politicians, in general, the collective West, have some secret, hidden agreements with Russia, suggesting that Ukraine will always remain within its sphere of interest? There are even entire conspiracy theories on this topic. So are there any secret agreements behind Ukraine's back?

— I generally don’t believe in conspiracy theories. Usually, conspiracy theories are one of the variants of magical thinking. Therefore, I don’t think such agreements exist. Otherwise, why would the West be so actively helping us? In reality, they are significantly keeping us afloat. And not just with military aid, but also with financial support.

By that logic (the "betrayal" of Ukraine. — Ed.), it would have been simpler to just hand Ukraine over to the Russians, so why all these expenses, efforts, diplomatic complications, and so on? Therefore, the version recently voiced by one journalist seems closer to the truth, regarding what happened in the Biden administration before the full-scale invasion of Russia and during the aggression.

It’s said that there (in Washington. — Ed.) they genuinely fear that, on one hand, strong assistance and inflicting real, serious military defeats on Russia will lead to Putin using nuclear weapons as a last resort. Because he will never reconcile with his defeat. Never. He will never recognize himself as the loser, conceding and leaving Ukraine alone.

And on the other hand, if part of occupied Ukraine is left to Putin, that would satisfy his interests, but only partially. Because he wants all of Ukraine, not just Donbas, Crimea, or southern Ukraine. Appeasement will only encourage Putin to new aggressions. Continuation of this military campaign in the future, of course, if he doesn’t pass away.

That’s why the world is currently in such an atmosphere of [uncertainty, a kind of passivity].

On the "deadlock" of the war and Russia's offensive

— Therefore, perhaps General Valery Zaluzhny made the resonant statement that the war has allegedly reached a deadlock. In your assessment, is this truly the case?

— Currently, the Russians continue their offensive. They have been advancing for a whole year. Essentially since the fall of 2023, they have been doing this relentlessly. Therefore, this is not quite a deadlock. The occupiers are advancing, capturing new territories, simply destroying our cities and villages, killing our people.

Thus, the tactical advantage is definitely on their side. It is also true that this advance has accelerated in recent months. Nevertheless, there are no rapid breakthroughs by Russia, large operations, encirclements, or exits to operational space. None of that exists. The war is essentially positional, with a gradual change of front lines. No one knows how long this may continue.

It is completely clear that the Russian leadership, back in 2022 after the blitzkrieg failure, switched to a strategy of war of attrition. Hoping for the obvious resource calculations that the Russians have significantly more resources than Ukraine. Therefore, they can push the situation without necessarily using military methods. But through, for example, exhausting Ukraine and forcing it to peace on their terms, capitulation, and possibly internal disorders and upheavals.

Currently, the Russians are entirely focused on this strategy. One can expect a black swan in Russia at any time, but one must work towards its arrival.