Putin: His Downfall and Russia's Coming Crash

by Richard Lourie

An electrifying and timely book, by leading Russian expert Richard Lourie, that explores Putin's failures and whether Trump's election gives Putin extraordinarily dangerous opportunities in our mad new world.

For reasons that are made clear in this book, Putin’s Russia will collapse just as Imperial Russia did in 1917 and as Soviet Russia did in 1991. The only questions are when, how violently, and with how much peril for the world. The U.S. election complicates everything, including:

· Putin’s next land grab
· Exploitations of the Arctic
· Cyber-espionage
· Putin and China
…and many more crucial topics.

Putin: His Downfall and Russia's Coming Crash is an essential read for everybody bewildered and dismayed by the new world order.

Genres: Nonfiction, Russia, Politics, History, Biography

288 pages, Hardcover

Published July 18, 2017

Reviews

[Louise · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first 75 or so pages are a short bio of Vladimir Putin. The last 20 pages deal with possibilities of Russia without Putin. The middle has chapters on the Ukraine, the Arctic, China, oil and symbolism in Russia.

While the book seems to be pasted together articles, some have interesting material. In the description of Putin’s rise to power Richard Lourie has a better description of Putin’s relationships with Boris Yeltsin and Antoly Sobchak than in the often cited Gesser bio: The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin. The Chapters on oil and the Arctic are good.

There is nothing on how the “downfall” of Putin might come about. There is some speculation about the chaos that might ensue. There are some names of those who might follow him.

The book is a quick read. The title is the book equivalent of a bait and switch.

[F.J. Soto · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book chronicles Vladimir Putin’s elevate to puissance, beginning with Putin’s early days as an allegiant KGB agent. Lourie examines the U.S.S.R.’s downfall and Russia’s chaotic postcommunist political climate, which propelled Putin’s ascension from the inconspicuous role of deputy chief of property, to first prime minister and later president. His main argument is that Putin’s Russia will eventually fall. To prove this point, he goes in-depth on Putin’s interest in the Arctic, Ukraine, China, and the Internet. This book serves as an essential primer on Putin and, by extension, Russia.
Very informative, and very true to the real situation in Russia that we can ascertain from the all different news outlets.
I would definitely would recommend to those that are looking to know more about the political interactions in that part of the world.
I received this book as giveaway.

[Zack · Rating 4 out of 5]

Goodreads Giveaway - The title of this book is deceptive, there is surprising little about Putin in this book despite the prominence of his name in the title. Roughly, this book is 40% Russian history, 40% Russian geography, and 20% Putin biography. If you're looking for a book about Putin and his history or current political situation, this is not the book for you. However, if you are looking for a quick primer on where Russia has been, where it currently is, and a few ideas of its future, this is a very good book. Quick, easy to read, with well written bites of information.

[Lena · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't have the right mindset going into this. I expected a biography, but it is much more focused on Russian history. For most of it, I felt like the history was incoherent and assumed I already knew some of it. It wasn't until the last third or so that I realized he was trying to pick out portions of Russian history that influenced specific aspects of Putin's rise and thinking. I might enjoy it more if I read it again with that understanding of what this book is.

[wally · Rating 3 out of 5]

another i finish in the tree stand, 3:19 pee em today, the 2nd of december 2017. three stars. i liked it. informative, something to consider, the artic and the possibilities there...potential trouble spots...kazakstan if i spelled that right. this that the other. at times anything but scholarly, outrageous opinion, something i'd hazard lourie will be embarrassed about. or not. bet not...there are none so blind as those who refuse to see. i'll leave it at that. but still, informative...and speculative. big on the speculative. kindle. library loaner. onward and upward. a bad day of hunting is when you forget your kindle at home. remembered it today. a plus.

[Dmitry · Rating 1 out of 5]

(The English review is placed beneath the Russian one)

Автор этой книги написал несколько других книг связанных с Россией и почему-то решил, что он сможет написать хорошую книгу о Путине или о путинской России. С моей точки зрения написать действительно хорошую, интересную и стоящую книгу у автора не получилось.

Во-первых, мне непонятна идея автора, время от времени, уходить в глубину веков, в историю Киевской Руси и Монгольского нашествия. Что автор хотел найти там? Неужели автор на полном серьёзе думает, что авторитарная Россия Путина стала возможной благодаря Монгольскому нашествию? Или что Путин стал результатом правления Ивана Грозного? У Германии тоже не простая история, однако, Германия, путь и не без помощи союзников по антигитлеровской коалиции, смогла построить настоящую демократию. У Южной Кореи и Японии тоже сложная история, в которой полно и диктаторов и авторитаризма, но это не помешало им построить современную и настоящую демократию. Может не в далёкой истории 10-15 веков нужно копаться, чтобы понять причины сегодняшних решений и событий? Так же не понятно, зачем автор посвящает столько времени истории Украины, если это государство в наименьшей степени влияло на формирование Российского государства? Другими словами, все исторические обзоры, что есть в книге, я нашёл бессмысленными и неуместными в контексте рассматриваемого вопроса.

Далее, автор, говоря про историю советской Украины, пишет следующее:

Because of the dishonesty of Soviet statistics and the execution of many statisticians in Stalin’s time, we don’t have a very exact number of how many Ukrainians perished during the Holodomor. As an example of shifting Soviet statistics, until the time of Gorbachev the figure for Soviet war dead was twenty million, a number that had acquired the tragic charisma of the six million Jews. Suddenly, and without even much fanfare, the official number was changed to twenty-six million. Where had that New York’s worth of the dead been all those years?
Some of the same holds true for the Holodomor as well. Making use of census data and the statistics that weren’t prohibited, like the production of various shoe sizes, scholars have constructed a general numerical picture of five million victims in Ukraine. Whatever the exact number, there is no doubt that the Holodomor qualifies as one of the great crimes of the twentieth century, that is to say of all history. The fact that this crime is largely unknown in the West and the wider world makes the pain of its memory all the keener.

Почему автор не упоминает, что голод был не только в советской Украине, но и советской России и советском Казахстане? Почему убийство Сталиным одних людей – это трагедия и преступление, а убийство и насильственное переселение других людей – это повод чтобы об этом промолчать? Почему у автора такая избирательность в отношении жертв сталинских преступлений? Я хочу особо подчеркнуть, что я не оправдываю Сталина и не пытаюсь принизить трагедию Голодомора, я лишь указываю на то, что автор почему-то не упомянул про других жертв голода того периода. (Возможно, под Голодомором автор подразумевает гибель, как украинцев, так и русских и казахов?).

В целом книга воспринимается как сборник разных статей очень слабо связанных друг с другом. Тут тебе детство и юность Путина и историческая справка о древней Российской истории (истории Московии) и правление Путина в качестве президента и о КГБ «несколько строк» и про 90-ые в России несколько глав. Другими словами, получился какой-то винегрет из тем из-за чего не понятно, что хочет сказать автор и из-за чего прочитанное моментально забывается. Поэтому главная проблема книги – отсутствие смыслового каркаса, т.е. главной идеи всей книги, а также хорошо подобранных тем, которые бы логично следовали одна за другой. Пусть автор и взял огромное количество тем, вот только об этом уже было сказано в куда более успешных книгах. К примеру, о 90-х в России лучше всего прочитать в книге «Олигархи. Богатство и власть в новой России», а на тему КГБ есть отдельные книги. Так же об истории Украины или об истории советской Украины есть отдельные книги, которые в разы лучше разъясняют данный вопрос. В этой же книге получилось всё очень поверхностно и хаотично.

Последнее что отмечу, это интересную фразу в контексте сегодняшнего скандала в среде либералов и демократов или так называемых либералов и демократов 90-х.

The figures are impressive. Thirty percent of the country lived in poverty in 1999, only 13 percent by 2008, the end of Putin’s second term. Real incomes rose 140 percent and GDP per capita went from $5,951 in 1999 to $20,276 in 2008. The dollar value of the Russian stock market in 2000 was $74 billion and by 2006 it was $1 trillion. For the first time in its history Russia had a middle class.
At this point Putin was still taking the sound advice of his economics minister, Alexei Kudrin, who had pushed hard for a sovereign wealth fund as protection from any future calamity. Even Khodorkovsky writing from prison had said: “Putin is probably not a liberal or a democrat, but he is more liberal and more democratic than seventy percent of the population.”

Откуда у людей причисляющих себя к российским либералам и демократам 90-х такая уверенность в том, что думает и что хочет народ? В современной России не было по-настоящему демократических выборов, в которых каждый участник получал бы равные возможности и имел бы равные права (как это имеет место в США и Европе). Нам всё время говорят, что российский народ на честный и свободных выборах выбрал бы какого-нибудь условного Гиркина или Баркашова, но откуда такая уверенность? Может пора говорит за себя, а не за весь народ?

The author of this book has written several other books related to Russia and, for some reason, decided that he could write a good book about Putin or Putin's Russia. From my point of view, the author failed to write a good, interesting, and worthwhile book.

First of all, I do not understand the idea of the author, from time to time, to go into the depth of centuries, into the history of Kievan Rus and the Mongol invasion. What did the author want to find there? Does the author seriously think that Putin's authoritarian Russia was made possible by the Mongol invasion? Or that Putin was the result of Ivan the Terrible's rule? Germany also has a complicated history, but Germany, not without the help of its allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, was able to build a real democracy. South Korea and Japan also have complicated histories, full of dictators and authoritarianism, but this did not prevent them from building modern and real democracies. Perhaps it's not in the distant history of the 10th-15th centuries that we need to dig to understand the reasons for today's decisions and events. It is also not clear why the author devotes so much time to the history of Ukraine if this state had the least influence on the formation of the Russian state. In other words, I found all the historical reviews in the book pointless and inappropriate in the context of the issue at hand.

Further, the author, speaking about the history of Soviet Ukraine, writes the following:

Because of the dishonesty of Soviet statistics and the execution of many statisticians in Stalin’s time, we don’t have a very exact number of how many Ukrainians perished during the Holodomor. As an example of shifting Soviet statistics, until the time of Gorbachev the figure for Soviet war dead was twenty million, a number that had acquired the tragic charisma of the six million Jews. Suddenly, and without even much fanfare, the official number was changed to twenty-six million. Where had that New York’s worth of the dead been all those years?
Some of the same holds true for the Holodomor as well. Making use of census data and the statistics that weren’t prohibited, like the production of various shoe sizes, scholars have constructed a general numerical picture of five million victims in Ukraine. Whatever the exact number, there is no doubt that the Holodomor qualifies as one of the great crimes of the twentieth century, that is to say of all history. The fact that this crime is largely unknown in the West and the wider world makes the pain of its memory all the keener.

Why doesn't the author mention that there was famine not only in Soviet Ukraine but also in Soviet Russia and Soviet Kazakhstan? Why is Stalin's murder of some people a tragedy and a crime, and the murder and forced relocation of others an excuse to keep silent about it? Why is the author so selective about the victims of Stalin's crimes? I want to emphasize that I am not justifying Stalin or trying to belittle the tragedy of the Holodomor. I am only pointing out that, for some reason, the author did not mention the other victims of the famine of that period. (Perhaps by Holodomor, the author means the deaths of both Ukrainians, Russians, and Kazakhs?)

In general, the book is perceived as a collection of different articles very loosely related to each other. There you have Putin's childhood and youth and historical references about ancient Russian history (history of Muscovy) and Putin's reign as president and about the KGB “a few lines” and about the 90's in Russia a few chapters. In other words, it turned out to be a vinaigrette of topics because of which it is not clear what the author wants to say, and because of which the whole reading will be instantly forgotten. Therefore, the main problem of the book is the lack of a semantic framework, i.e., the main idea of the whole book, as well as well-chosen topics that would logically follow one after another. The author may have taken a huge number of topics, but this has already been mentioned in much more successful books. For example, the best way to learn about the '90s in Russia is to read about it in the book “The Oligarchs: Wealth and Power in the New Russia,” and, on the topic of the KGB, there are separate books. Similarly, there are separate books about the history of Ukraine or the history of Soviet Ukraine, which explain this issue many times better. In this book, everything is very superficial and chaotic.

The last thing I'll note is an interesting phrase in the context of today's scandal among liberals and Democrats or so-called liberals and Democrats of the 90s.

The figures are impressive. Thirty percent of the country lived in poverty in 1999, only 13 percent by 2008, the end of Putin’s second term. Real incomes rose 140 percent and GDP per capita went from $5,951 in 1999 to $20,276 in 2008. The dollar value of the Russian stock market in 2000 was $74 billion and by 2006 it was $1 trillion. For the first time in its history Russia had a middle class.
At this point Putin was still taking the sound advice of his economics minister, Alexei Kudrin, who had pushed hard for a sovereign wealth fund as protection from any future calamity. Even Khodorkovsky writing from prison had said: “Putin is probably not a liberal or a democrat, but he is more liberal and more democratic than seventy percent of the population.”

Where do people who identify themselves as Russian liberals and democrats of the 90s get such confidence in what the people think and want? There have been no truly democratic elections in modern Russia in which every participant would get equal opportunities and have equal rights (as is the case in the USA and Europe). We are always being told that the Russian people would have chosen some conditional Girkin or Barkashov in a fair and free election, but how can we be so sure? Maybe it's time to speak for ourselves and not for all the people.

[Joefrohlinger · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting. 2/3 dedicated to learning more about his background and history. Part that I enjoyed the most was learning about the author's thoughts on the future (expansion plans for domination in the North Pole etc) and what or who comes next in Russia. Thoughts on China and what makes Putin tick make this fascinating and well worth reading given the current political climate.

[Therese · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a sobering read about a man who is his own Gulag. Sphinx-like, Putin gives nothing away, either metaphorically or physically. He has amassed wealth far beyond the imagining of the Csars. There was a man called Garoust Gulbenkian who traded oil from Baku, Azerbaijan. He was called "Mr. 5%" due to the fees or kick-backs he demanded from those with whom he did business. It is not known what percentage Putin expects from the oligarchs who run Russian financial and other companies. Gazprom, its oil industry, is state-owned,and it is not unlikely that Putin has a controlling interest. Herein lies Russia's dilemma. Since Putin ascended to power in 2002, he has failed to diversify Russian industry and commerce. Hovering around $50 a barrel, Putin's stubborn reliance on oil may very well precipitate a collapse of the Russian economy. Putin himself will not suffer any negaive financial consequences, as his money is likely stowed abroad in a variety of numbered accounts hiding behind shell companies, but the fallout for Russia's population would be disastrous. Richard Louries knows whereof he writes, he speaks Russian, and is the author of the autobiography of Joseph Stalin, and the biography of Andrei Sakharov. Lourie signalled his concerns about Putin's designs on the Arctic, as well as along the border of China, no doubt emboldened by his invasion and propping up of Bashar alAssad in Syria. Putin has chosen to ignore recent history, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, its 10-year war that ended in defeat, the astronomical costs of which helped bring about the collapse of the USSR. This is a timely and necessary book for those concerned about the geopolitical landscape.

[John · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is seriously in need of an editor. Not only are many words omitted or misspelled, but not even a single incidence of the Chapter Footnotes were noted in the actual text. This book was obviously overly rushed for Publication.

In addition, there is very little in the book about Putin himself - everything specifically said about him could have been collapsed in one small Chapter. So the Title of the book is very misleading. Rather than being about Putin, it is actually about the history, recent and current political/social situation of the USSR/Russia.

The title is also misleading in that it does not build a strong, detailed or convincing case about "his downfall and Russia's coming crash". It is mentioned as sort of an afterthought, but as only a very vague possibility.

[Hilly · Rating 2 out of 5]

I take issue with books that have obvious typos. This book had a plethora of them. As for the content, it was mediocre. I have read more extensive books on Putin, and this just regurgitated most of what I have read before. There was a slant to the author's book, which I didn't mind; but it might irk others. I feel as though the title is misleading. The book is less about Putin, and more about Russia's standing in the current global climate.

If you want to read more about Putin, A Man Without a Face is probably a better selection

[Spikeybär · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is slightly hampered by typos and factual errors (e.g.: confusing NATO in Bosnia with NATO in Kosovo), and certain pages read like paraphrased Wikipedia entries, but overall Lourie has a knack for journalistic writing and presents and entertaining and informative short overview. The title, however, is a misnomer.

[Caroline · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book if you want to understand the KGB Putin and why he is one of the richest people in the world. He was trained to have the KGB mindset in all his decisions for Russia. Highly recommend this book! I won this book from Goodreads Giveaway. Thank you.

[J · Rating 2 out of 5]

I could go 2 1/2 stars since I learned some info about Putin and modern Russia. As others have mentioned, I feel the subtitle about downfall and crash not fulfilled. I will be watching for developments in the Arctic Circle.

[Alec Watkins · Rating 2 out of 5]

The title was rather misleading, as most of this book was not about reasons why Russia's current government is going to crash, but the cover looks nice, so there's that.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

OK, I suppose this is something of a spoiler, but the title of this book is the book sales equivalent of clickbait in the sense that the book's contents is not much about Putin's downfall or a coming crash for Russia.

I just finished a book about Putin's Russia by Masha Gessen that was roughly two and half times longer than this book (The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia) and on the back book cover of this there is a blurb from Gessen, "It takes deep knowledge of Russian history and an intimate understanding of its culture to be able to describe its current state so concisely." The main point here is that while this book covers considerable amounts of Russia's history as well as Putin's, the book still clocks in at only 224 pages. This is possible by choosing different persons and events that are intended to be emblematic for certain tendencies and trends without much (or any) background or detail.

The author, Richard Lourie, seems to know quite a bit about Russia, having published an interesting variety of non-fiction and fictional works related to Russian and Soviet history as well as translations of fiction from Russian into English. That's all good.

A book that reduces so much complexity naturally depends on the choices made by the author. I think of myself as knowing something about Russia and I wouldn't say that while reading this that I had any problems with the choices Lourie made but I sometimes wondered how (or if) readers who were (much) less familiar with Russia would understand his points.

The book is organized around covering the relevant political history, both macro (Russia and the world) and micro (Putin) with the main focus on roughly Gorbachev forward, with some reference to earlier Soviet and Russian history, then certain economic and geographic imperatives, from dependency on oil to Ukraine, Kazakhstan, China and the Arctic. A short chapter near the end, "How Vladimir Putin learned to stop worrying and love the Internet" seemed weak, trying to cover both internal policies and history as well as the Russian influencing of the election of Trump, eventually concluding that Putin must love the Internet as a weapon since it can "damage political enemies, smear those who testify against you, even destabilize an opponent's political system. It was almost untraceable, utterly deniable, and wonderfully cheap." In this case, the supporting evidence offered seems a little more disorganized (or random) in its presentation, but it is a new topic and quite unlike much of the rest, so perhaps this not surprising.

The last chapter is introduced with two different quotes - one by Eduard Limonov (who is otherwise not mentioned in the book, so God knows how an average person is to understand the significance of a quote from this Russian figure) and another from Garry Kasparov (who is identified as a "chess champion" and not as a figure of opposition to Putin). Kasparov is quoted as saying, "Putin will die in the Kremlin, but when and how nobody knows." And this is pretty much how the book ends. Putin and Putin's version of Russia will end because Putin can't last forever, can he? And because Putin has made no effort to set up any kind of succession.

The end. Not, I would say, a very satisfying end, either. But up to that point it was pretty good.

[Roger Smitter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Published in 2017, Putin: His Downfall of Russia’s and Russian Russia’s Coming Crash should be covered by a second book to explain what has happened in the past few months.

Most of the book focuses on how Putin came to power The author notes “Even for a man of ferocious ambition and killer instincts to rise form unemployed bureaucrat to present in the space of three and a half years (72-73) The author puts him in the frame of Genghis Khan, Napoleon, and Hitler (85). It’s a story of moving up through the organization in Russia’s party.

Chapter 7, “The Heart of the Matter:” makes the book especially important in this time of this review. While the book was published in 2017, now we read it in March-April of 2022 where Putin has attracted Ukraine. Author Lourie might stand differently on Putin.

The timing of this book should be a good experience for a wide range of readers now. .

[Emmett Hoops · Rating 3 out of 5]

Richard Lourie has written an informative and important book. Americans know so very little about Russia and its culture: this small book will give readers a decent understanding of how Russia got to where it is today and what that means in terms of its domestic and foreign policies. What the book does not deliver is anything like a biography of Vladimir Putin. The book's title promises "His Downfall and Russia's Coming Crash" and yet we hear no intimation of this until very near the end. Most of the book is background information on what makes Russia tick -- which is, as I said, valuable enough; it's just not what the book promised.

[Lucy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was far more absorbing than I'd expected, and served as a primer on Putin and his circle of oligarchs. It gives great explanations of his possible motives — not only for interfering with US electoral processes, but why and how'd he would benefit from a more docile and compliant USA. Where the book falls short is in enumerating the consequences to Russia and the rest of the world if Putin should die in office or have reason to seek sanctuary away from Moscow; but who can really foresee the future...? Yet clearly this is a writer who knows his material. I've decided a good follow-up would be Dmitri Trenin's book about why Putin's in the Middle East.

[Ford · Rating 2 out of 5]

Because of the author bias and hatred of President Trump I am not sure he could write a non-fiction book. The preface and final chapters are just full of the radical left bias. Richard, I voted for Trump because of Obamacare. In 2016 half of my pension went to paying my health care premiums and with the cost increase for 2017 Obamacare wants my whole pension. Russians did not influence the elections. But, between the preface and the last chapters the book was very interesting. Learn more about Russian History.

[John · Rating 1 out of 5]

I had high hopes that I would learn a new perspective on Putin but, I got only as far as the second page when the author wrote...that the Russians may rue their ALLEGED decision to see Donald trump be President because Hilary Clinton, "despite all her animus toward Moscow..."!!!


Seriously!!??

Uranium One
$500,000 speaking fees for Billy Boy, etc

I think i just wasted a precious 10 minutes of my life

[Sarah W. · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book, published in 2017, makes for an odd read in 2024. On some points, like the historical roots of Putin and Russia's attitude towards Ukraine, the author is insightful and almost prescient. On others, well, no one can predict the future and the lines about Alexei Navalny not being aggressively prosecuted feel remarkably off base. This book serves as a decent enough overview, but I found little that I had not already known.

[Marlene · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thought I would read a short biography about Putin and although this isn't much of a biography, it gives a concise idea of modern (2017) Russian history. It was eye-opening for me because I haven't paid attention to news about Russia over the last 20+ years but this book described topics in an accessible format.

[Chris · Rating 2 out of 5]

Aside from the anti-Trump rhetoric which has now proven to be untrue this book is a good primer on Putin, some Russian and USSR history and why Ukraine has recently been invaded.

It also discusses the relationships Putin has with the Oligarchs and opponents and how he has been able to maintain power.

I recommend this book.

[Kevin]

A short, but information-packed book about Putin's rise to power, and what could happen after Putin to Russia. A great companion to the book "Putinism", which is more from a historical/cultural angle.

[GreyAtlas · Rating 2 out of 5]

Adds nothing new to the conversation, and glosses over stuff that deserved more analysis. The chapters strayed in subject matter like a squirrel, and were not concise at all. The theme and message of the book were lost and scattered. Waste of time, would not recommend for any serious reader.

[Nayan Momaya · Rating 3 out of 5]

The start and the end of the book is good. I was feeling lost sometimes in between while reading. Some good insights have been provided about the border complications that Russia has with its neighbors among a plethora of other problems that Russia deals with.

[Aminul Haque · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good account of Putin's political life, intertwined with the history of post-Soviet Russian politics. Lourie gives some account of what to expect next, which is even more foreboding. Russian people deserves better.

[Corey Friedrich · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author gave good insight into not only what might motivate Putin to do the things he does, but he also showed how this fits into Russian culture as well. It definitely made me see how Putin's actions are more calculated and not so much impulsive randomness on the part of a madman.

[Marita · Rating 5 out of 5]

My rating reflects my ignorance of the subject more than anything else. Easy to read and well reasoned. Really enjoyed it.

[Diane Erickson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A deep and eye opening book.

Understanding and explaining the Russian President today is complicated and deep. Laurie nailed it! A book to read and reread.