What do you think?
Rate this book
Shapers of International History
Vladimir Putin and Russian Statecraft
Since Russian leader Vladimir Putin assumed power in August 1999, speculation about his character, motives, and plans for Russia’s future has been rampant in the West. A portrait of Putin has emerged in the West that is one-dimensional, ill informed, and diametrically opposed to the image of Putin the majority of Russians hold. Even after he stepped down as president in May 2008, retaining a significant measure of power as prime minister under his hand-picked successor, President Dmitri Medvedev, Putin remains poorly understood. In this interpretive biography of Putin, Allen C. Lynch seeks to reconcile the two conflicting images and find out just where the truth lies about the man and the statesman.
Westerners view Putin as an authoritarian holdover from the Soviet era who has clamped down on domestic opposition, freedom of the press, and other elements of a functioning democracy and who has relentlessly exerted Russian influence abroad, challenging the West and seeking to control its post-Soviet periphery. Most Russians, in contrast, are likely to be grateful to Putin for presiding over an economic recovery and reasserting Russian dignity on the world stage. A complete apprehension of the Russian leader, according to Lynch, requires an understanding of the way in which Putin’s personal experiences and critical events in recent Russian history have shaped his outlook. Lynch convincingly demonstrates how a complex interplay of Russia’s post-Soviet circumstances and the particular path of Putin’s career have informed his choices as leader.
Westerners view Putin as an authoritarian holdover from the Soviet era who has clamped down on domestic opposition, freedom of the press, and other elements of a functioning democracy and who has relentlessly exerted Russian influence abroad, challenging the West and seeking to control its post-Soviet periphery. Most Russians, in contrast, are likely to be grateful to Putin for presiding over an economic recovery and reasserting Russian dignity on the world stage. A complete apprehension of the Russian leader, according to Lynch, requires an understanding of the way in which Putin’s personal experiences and critical events in recent Russian history have shaped his outlook. Lynch convincingly demonstrates how a complex interplay of Russia’s post-Soviet circumstances and the particular path of Putin’s career have informed his choices as leader.
184 pages, Hardcover
First published September 30, 2011
7 people are currently reading
72 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 8, 2015
This book is a great antidote to the Karen Dawisha/Frontline hysteria that's been making the rounds.
If you want to know more of my thoughts on the Dawisha and Frontline issues, please see:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Fron...
I use Lynch's book, among other sources, to buttress some of my critique of Dawisha and the Frontline program, "Putin's Way," which violated several of Frontline's own stated journalistic guidelines.
Lynch's political biography of Putin is a sober and scholarly analysis of Putin the man, the current political conditions of the Russian Federation and the relationship between the two.
Lynch's assessment of Putin is that, in addition to having conservative views on honor and loyalty, he is extremely intelligent and recognizes (and is even open to) many aspects of western democracy on an intellectual level; but Putin also has certain psychological facets to his personality that make him lean toward control, particularly in times of crisis.
I think this is a reasonable assessment. Putin is indeed preoccupied with stability. The disintegration of the Soviet Union and subsequent chaos that enveloped Russia during the 1990's made an indelible impression on Putin, as it did on most Russians.
I also think it would be fair to say that most leaders would have some of those same tendencies if faced with the challenges that Russia has had in the past two decades, including a lone superpower overrun by neo-Wilsonian and neoconservative thinking that continues to move a hostile military alliance right up to Russia’s borders, funnels money to opposition figures that want to topple the Russian government – even going so far as having an ambassador (Michael McFaul) that actively supported the opposition in violation of diplomatic protocol, and an oligarchy inherited from the previous leadership – some of whom bristled at having any constraints placed on their behavior and continued to collude with hostile powers to cause trouble (Khodorkovsky and the late Berezovsky).
What also has to be kept in mind is that Russia is trying to find its way in the midst many challenges with no historical experience with democratic institutions prior to Gorbachev's brief rule.
Contrary to Dawisha's mishmash of unverified sources and discredited theories, Lynch describes Putin's relative honesty when he was working as deputy mayor of St. Petersburg in the 90's:
"For much of this time, given (mayor Anatoliy) Sobchak's frequent and protracted absences and his preoccupation with national affairs, Putin assumed the functions of acting mayor. He supervised the drafting and implementation of countless international business deals and policy reforms. These transactions did not always go according to plan, and no doubt many profited handsomely from Putin's admitted inexperience in these matters. During his attempt to establish municipal oversight over a series of casinos, for example, the city was cheated. In another case, the city was fleeced for $120 million for two shipments of cooking oil. Although during this period his mother bought a choice apartment at an exceptionally low price at a city auction, Putin didn't seem to enrich himself personally. In the one specific public charge of corruption that was brought against him, Putin sued in court for slander and won…."
This assessment is confirmed by other sources as noted in my article on Dawisha and Frontline.
Lynch also details Putin's career in the KGB and how his actual job, throughout most of it, was as a low-level analyst in Dresden. Disenchanted with the agency, Putin voluntarily quit the KGB in the early 1990’s, not long after passing up a potential promotion to "the headquarters of the KGB's foreign intelligence operations," opting to keep his family in St. Petersburg where they had secure housing, which would have been difficult to obtain in Moscow.
In the latter chapters, Lynch sums up that, contrary to the hysterical and propagandistic statements thrown around by many western politicians and pundits, Russia is not presently a dictatorship or an autocracy, but that the governance in that vast country is far more nuanced and complex:
"For all the impressive aura of authority surrounding his presidency, Putin was no dictator. Nor was his affinity for authoritarian rule similar to the unbridled totalitarianism of Soviet days. Substantial sectors of the economy remained in private hands, including scores of billions of dollars in liquid capital in private banks abroad. A considerable public forum existed for debate on public issues, though much more so in the press than on television. Furthermore, Russians had the right to travel abroad pretty much as they pleased; availability of funds, not political considerations, was their main constraint. Religious adherents of Russia’s historical religions of Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism were free to practice their faith more or less as they pleased. Putin’s Russia, measured by any Cold War standard, represented impressive progress from the Soviet period. (p. 88)
….In foreign affairs, Russia has no ideologically based conflicts with the outside world and has pursued a mainly pragmatic diplomacy, not always successful, aimed at maximizing Russian revenues and minimizing Russia’s enemies." (p. 133)
In terms of the legal system, Lynch confirms what I've heard from other credible sources - that there is a dual track in some limited circumstances:
"In the overwhelming majority of the millions of legal cases that are handled in Russia each year, the outcomes are decided on the basis of codified law as interpreted by judges and without political pressure. This situation changes, however, when the political and economic interests of the Kremlin are involved. " (p. 84)
I do have a couple of quibbles with the book which prevented me from giving it 5 starts. The first is that it would have been useful for Lynch to have provided some analysis and discussion of two historical Russian figures that are known to be influential to Putin's political thinking: Ivan Ilyn (1) and Pyotr Stolypin (2). Both were anti-Revolutionary reformers and/or political philosophers who were interested in advancing Russia toward a developed nation based on the rule of law via gradual and thoughtful reform.
I suspect the reason that this was not done was due to the tendency to view and judge both Putin and Russia through a Western lens with the implicit assumption that the way the West does things represents the supreme way of doing things, best summed up by Margaret Thatcher's declaration that "There is no alternative (TINA)."
This attitude was even more prominent in Angus Roxburgh’s The Strongman: Vladimir Putin and the Struggle for Russia, in which Roxburgh’s Western bias at times bordered on the patronizing. However, he was more even-handed than many others and provided much valuable behind-the-scenes insight of Russia’s relations with the West from 2000 to 2012. I recommend that book, along with this one, for those interested in serious political biographies of Putin.
The other quibble with Lynch's book was the occasional use of non-credible sources like Freedom House which gets 80% of its funding from the US government via the National Endowment for Democracy and, as I have written elsewhere, has a tendency to assess a country's level of freedom, not based on consistent and objective criteria, but based on whether the country is an ally of the US and/or receptive to US corporate interests.
1) Ivan Ilyn - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/...
2) Pyotr Stolypin - http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-r...
If you want to know more of my thoughts on the Dawisha and Frontline issues, please see:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Fron...
I use Lynch's book, among other sources, to buttress some of my critique of Dawisha and the Frontline program, "Putin's Way," which violated several of Frontline's own stated journalistic guidelines.
Lynch's political biography of Putin is a sober and scholarly analysis of Putin the man, the current political conditions of the Russian Federation and the relationship between the two.
Lynch's assessment of Putin is that, in addition to having conservative views on honor and loyalty, he is extremely intelligent and recognizes (and is even open to) many aspects of western democracy on an intellectual level; but Putin also has certain psychological facets to his personality that make him lean toward control, particularly in times of crisis.
I think this is a reasonable assessment. Putin is indeed preoccupied with stability. The disintegration of the Soviet Union and subsequent chaos that enveloped Russia during the 1990's made an indelible impression on Putin, as it did on most Russians.
I also think it would be fair to say that most leaders would have some of those same tendencies if faced with the challenges that Russia has had in the past two decades, including a lone superpower overrun by neo-Wilsonian and neoconservative thinking that continues to move a hostile military alliance right up to Russia’s borders, funnels money to opposition figures that want to topple the Russian government – even going so far as having an ambassador (Michael McFaul) that actively supported the opposition in violation of diplomatic protocol, and an oligarchy inherited from the previous leadership – some of whom bristled at having any constraints placed on their behavior and continued to collude with hostile powers to cause trouble (Khodorkovsky and the late Berezovsky).
What also has to be kept in mind is that Russia is trying to find its way in the midst many challenges with no historical experience with democratic institutions prior to Gorbachev's brief rule.
Contrary to Dawisha's mishmash of unverified sources and discredited theories, Lynch describes Putin's relative honesty when he was working as deputy mayor of St. Petersburg in the 90's:
"For much of this time, given (mayor Anatoliy) Sobchak's frequent and protracted absences and his preoccupation with national affairs, Putin assumed the functions of acting mayor. He supervised the drafting and implementation of countless international business deals and policy reforms. These transactions did not always go according to plan, and no doubt many profited handsomely from Putin's admitted inexperience in these matters. During his attempt to establish municipal oversight over a series of casinos, for example, the city was cheated. In another case, the city was fleeced for $120 million for two shipments of cooking oil. Although during this period his mother bought a choice apartment at an exceptionally low price at a city auction, Putin didn't seem to enrich himself personally. In the one specific public charge of corruption that was brought against him, Putin sued in court for slander and won…."
This assessment is confirmed by other sources as noted in my article on Dawisha and Frontline.
Lynch also details Putin's career in the KGB and how his actual job, throughout most of it, was as a low-level analyst in Dresden. Disenchanted with the agency, Putin voluntarily quit the KGB in the early 1990’s, not long after passing up a potential promotion to "the headquarters of the KGB's foreign intelligence operations," opting to keep his family in St. Petersburg where they had secure housing, which would have been difficult to obtain in Moscow.
In the latter chapters, Lynch sums up that, contrary to the hysterical and propagandistic statements thrown around by many western politicians and pundits, Russia is not presently a dictatorship or an autocracy, but that the governance in that vast country is far more nuanced and complex:
"For all the impressive aura of authority surrounding his presidency, Putin was no dictator. Nor was his affinity for authoritarian rule similar to the unbridled totalitarianism of Soviet days. Substantial sectors of the economy remained in private hands, including scores of billions of dollars in liquid capital in private banks abroad. A considerable public forum existed for debate on public issues, though much more so in the press than on television. Furthermore, Russians had the right to travel abroad pretty much as they pleased; availability of funds, not political considerations, was their main constraint. Religious adherents of Russia’s historical religions of Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism were free to practice their faith more or less as they pleased. Putin’s Russia, measured by any Cold War standard, represented impressive progress from the Soviet period. (p. 88)
….In foreign affairs, Russia has no ideologically based conflicts with the outside world and has pursued a mainly pragmatic diplomacy, not always successful, aimed at maximizing Russian revenues and minimizing Russia’s enemies." (p. 133)
In terms of the legal system, Lynch confirms what I've heard from other credible sources - that there is a dual track in some limited circumstances:
"In the overwhelming majority of the millions of legal cases that are handled in Russia each year, the outcomes are decided on the basis of codified law as interpreted by judges and without political pressure. This situation changes, however, when the political and economic interests of the Kremlin are involved. " (p. 84)
I do have a couple of quibbles with the book which prevented me from giving it 5 starts. The first is that it would have been useful for Lynch to have provided some analysis and discussion of two historical Russian figures that are known to be influential to Putin's political thinking: Ivan Ilyn (1) and Pyotr Stolypin (2). Both were anti-Revolutionary reformers and/or political philosophers who were interested in advancing Russia toward a developed nation based on the rule of law via gradual and thoughtful reform.
I suspect the reason that this was not done was due to the tendency to view and judge both Putin and Russia through a Western lens with the implicit assumption that the way the West does things represents the supreme way of doing things, best summed up by Margaret Thatcher's declaration that "There is no alternative (TINA)."
This attitude was even more prominent in Angus Roxburgh’s The Strongman: Vladimir Putin and the Struggle for Russia, in which Roxburgh’s Western bias at times bordered on the patronizing. However, he was more even-handed than many others and provided much valuable behind-the-scenes insight of Russia’s relations with the West from 2000 to 2012. I recommend that book, along with this one, for those interested in serious political biographies of Putin.
The other quibble with Lynch's book was the occasional use of non-credible sources like Freedom House which gets 80% of its funding from the US government via the National Endowment for Democracy and, as I have written elsewhere, has a tendency to assess a country's level of freedom, not based on consistent and objective criteria, but based on whether the country is an ally of the US and/or receptive to US corporate interests.
1) Ivan Ilyn - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/...
2) Pyotr Stolypin - http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-r...
lookedinto-decidedagainst
March 28, 2015Being Churchillian in nature, I will not entertain a Putin pity party of a book
January 1, 2019
Rounding up from 3.5.
This is a very competent and refreshingly balanced analysis of the first decade of Putin's rule (the first decade of this century), along with some interesting biographical tidbits. Lynch is knowledgeable and smart enough not to get involved in silly Russophobic propaganda, and yet he's able to provide a nuanced critique of the modern Russian state, both its strengths and its flaws.
Some irritating pro-western 'liberal capitalist' biases - and the fact that it's a few years out of date - bring the overall rating down a bit, but it's a worthwhile read nonetheless.
This is a very competent and refreshingly balanced analysis of the first decade of Putin's rule (the first decade of this century), along with some interesting biographical tidbits. Lynch is knowledgeable and smart enough not to get involved in silly Russophobic propaganda, and yet he's able to provide a nuanced critique of the modern Russian state, both its strengths and its flaws.
Some irritating pro-western 'liberal capitalist' biases - and the fact that it's a few years out of date - bring the overall rating down a bit, but it's a worthwhile read nonetheless.
November 10, 2016
Sober view on Putin, and the state of things in Russia that required such a personality to move things around.
Very apt read to finish, as the international order will shift left and right after this round of presidential election. It is important to think hard about Russia and China at this stage.
This sketches out some values, and some hidden needs in Russia that the vilification from American media has been quick to hide, in their agenda-driven discussions.
Very apt read to finish, as the international order will shift left and right after this round of presidential election. It is important to think hard about Russia and China at this stage.
This sketches out some values, and some hidden needs in Russia that the vilification from American media has been quick to hide, in their agenda-driven discussions.
April 30, 2012
This is kind of an academic book. I just wanted to know more about Putin. It covers from his childhood to present and basically describes his career path and a bit about his personal life. I give it a C.
January 9, 2014
Lynch presents an informed view of this powerful politician. He provides information on the economic recovery Russia experienced under Putin, and he also convincingly shows missteps, mismanagement, and corruption in his government.
August 17, 2012
A good brief overview of Putin's life up to 2011. Balanced treatment, a bit more sympathetic than many accounts I have read.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews