What do you think?
Rate this book
The Strongman: Vladimir Putin and the Struggle for Russia
Vladimir Putin has turned Russia from fledgling democracy into a police state, and in 2020 a constitutional change gave him the means to stay in power until 2036. In this acclaimed political biography, former BBC Moscow correspondent Angus Roxburgh charts the dramatic fight for Russia's future under Putin. Roxburgh shows how the former KGB man evolved from reformer to autocrat, how he sought the West's respect but earned its fear and contempt.
Drawing on dozens of exclusive interviews in Russia, where he worked for a time as a Kremlin insider advising Putin on press relations, as well as in the US and Europe, Roxburgh also argues that the West threw away chances to bring Russia in from the cold, by failing to understand its fears and aspirations following the collapse of communism. This updated edition includes new chapters on Putin and Donald Trump, on Russia's wars in Ukraine and Syria, and on Putin's ruthless attempt to rout all political opposition.
Drawing on dozens of exclusive interviews in Russia, where he worked for a time as a Kremlin insider advising Putin on press relations, as well as in the US and Europe, Roxburgh also argues that the West threw away chances to bring Russia in from the cold, by failing to understand its fears and aspirations following the collapse of communism. This updated edition includes new chapters on Putin and Donald Trump, on Russia's wars in Ukraine and Syria, and on Putin's ruthless attempt to rout all political opposition.
464 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2011
33 people are currently reading
596 people want to read
About the author
Angus Roxburgh
7 books9 followersAngus Roxburgh (born 1954) is a British journalist, broadcaster, former PR adviser to the Russian government, and singer-songwriter.
Born in 1954 in Scarborough, England, and raised in Scotland, Roxburgh studied Russian and German at the universities of Aberdeen and Zurich. After graduation he taught Russian at Aberdeen University and then worked as a translator for Progress Publishers in Moscow. He wrote a book about the Soviet media, titled Pravda: Inside the Soviet News Machine.
Born in 1954 in Scarborough, England, and raised in Scotland, Roxburgh studied Russian and German at the universities of Aberdeen and Zurich. After graduation he taught Russian at Aberdeen University and then worked as a translator for Progress Publishers in Moscow. He wrote a book about the Soviet media, titled Pravda: Inside the Soviet News Machine.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews
May 20, 2015
I think this is an outstandingly good book. Totally fascinating – a must for anyone interested in contemporary Russia from a Western perspective. The author is more than qualified to write about Russia – having served both The Sunday Times and the BBC as a Moscow correspondent. He also did a stint as an advisor in the Kremlin press office. He has a wonderful writing style, a lot of complex information is presented clearly and very interestingly.
The first chapter gives an excellent analysis and synopsis of Russia under Boris Yeltsin - during the chaotic, frightening and wild cowboy years of the 1990s.
From there the book moves on to Vladimir Putin – the president with an iron hand in an iron glove - trying to keep control over the hugely powerful oligarch mafia, the vast natural resources of Russia – particularly gas and oil, and angry and suspicious in his relations with America and the UK. Under his governance though Russia’s greatest weakness continued to blossom – corruption , corruption, and more corruption.
Finally the book touches upon the more liberal rule of President Medvedev. A sliver of presidency between the two terms of office with Putin at the helm.
The main themes dealt with in this book:
*Putin’s introduction of lower taxes, in a last ditch effort to get individuals and companies to pay their taxes – and how successful a strategy that proved to be.
*How Putin got control of Russian television.
*The two very brutal wars in Chechnya, and finally the instigation of a morally questionable, but Russian-friendly president there.
*Russia’s invasion of Georgia following Georgia’s attempt to annexe South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and the disapproval of the West at Russia’s invasion. (This was done while Medvedev was president.)
*NATO extending its membership to ex-Soviet Union countries bordering on Russia, and the degree to which this upset and worried Russia.
*Rampant acts of terrorism in Russia, with heavy casualties. Ostensibly carried out by Chechnian rebels, but in some instances it has been suggested that Russian intelligence might have been involved. (Sometimes an own goal can further political ends.) Personally I find this hard to believe, given the horrendous nature of the terrorist acts.
*Ongoing difficulties with weapons’ treaties. Mostly because Russian and American aims are so different. Russia particularly concerned about proposals for the USA’s Missile Defence Shield.
*The excellent way – for the most part – that Russia responded to the global financial crash of 2008.
*NASHI – a 100,000 strong youth organisation started by Putin to support his party and aims. It can be pretty heavy handed at times and the book describes the experience of a British ambassador who was harassed by them.
*Putin’s restructuring of the processes of voting for regional government, so that he had much more control over who runs the country, at all levels.
*Cronyism. Time and time again Putin puts his friends in power.
*Putin’s efforts to get more Russian control of its natural resources, lessening the degree to which the West could invest in these. Sometimes this investment-restructuring was done in a questionable way, and created international mistrust about the safety of investing in Russia.
*The way the Russian economy depends on its natural resources, rather than the manufacturing sector. It is not often you see things labelled "Made in Russia."
* Russia suddenly stopping oil and gas supplies to Eastern Europe, as a political ploy, causing mayhem. Russia deemed a very risky (but necessary) supplier of natural resources.
*Putin’s efforts to invest abroad, particularly his efforts to get a controlling stake in some major companies. These efforts are thwarted.
*Murders. Lots of them. Journalists. Lawyers. Anyone who opposes the government. Probably done mostly by the FSB (the re-vamped KGB.) Putin used to work for both organisations.
*Crackdowns on the large number of NGOs in Russia with support from abroad. Putin thinks they are major examples of the West infiltrating Russia.
* How various foreign companies have experienced corruption in Russia.
“The World Bank publishes an annual survey in which it ranks 183 countries of the world according to ‘ease of doing business’. In 2011 Russia came in at 123 – far behind other post-Soviet states..... “
“Between 2008 and 2009 the average size of a bribe in Russia nearly tripled – according to an interior ministry report – to more than $776 (American dollars)..... By July 2010, according to the same official body, the average bribe had reached $1,500, and by July 2011 the incredible sum of $10,000.”
*Spies. Russian and American ones. I had no idea they were so ubiquitous, and such an accepted part of international relations!
All in all this was a marvellous book. I have one criticism – and it is not for this book alone..... I think all dates given incompletely ought to have the year in brackets after the month. For instance one paragraph will mention January 2008 – then a few pages on the book will say “in April”, then a page or so after that it will say “in November”. Please can we have instead “in April (2008)” and then “in November (2008).” It is really difficult to keep tabs on dates with all these free floating months just hanging around, sometimes with several pages between them. Especially when the years mentioned do not always follow on consecutively....
The first chapter gives an excellent analysis and synopsis of Russia under Boris Yeltsin - during the chaotic, frightening and wild cowboy years of the 1990s.
From there the book moves on to Vladimir Putin – the president with an iron hand in an iron glove - trying to keep control over the hugely powerful oligarch mafia, the vast natural resources of Russia – particularly gas and oil, and angry and suspicious in his relations with America and the UK. Under his governance though Russia’s greatest weakness continued to blossom – corruption , corruption, and more corruption.
Finally the book touches upon the more liberal rule of President Medvedev. A sliver of presidency between the two terms of office with Putin at the helm.
The main themes dealt with in this book:
*Putin’s introduction of lower taxes, in a last ditch effort to get individuals and companies to pay their taxes – and how successful a strategy that proved to be.
*How Putin got control of Russian television.
*The two very brutal wars in Chechnya, and finally the instigation of a morally questionable, but Russian-friendly president there.
*Russia’s invasion of Georgia following Georgia’s attempt to annexe South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and the disapproval of the West at Russia’s invasion. (This was done while Medvedev was president.)
*NATO extending its membership to ex-Soviet Union countries bordering on Russia, and the degree to which this upset and worried Russia.
*Rampant acts of terrorism in Russia, with heavy casualties. Ostensibly carried out by Chechnian rebels, but in some instances it has been suggested that Russian intelligence might have been involved. (Sometimes an own goal can further political ends.) Personally I find this hard to believe, given the horrendous nature of the terrorist acts.
*Ongoing difficulties with weapons’ treaties. Mostly because Russian and American aims are so different. Russia particularly concerned about proposals for the USA’s Missile Defence Shield.
*The excellent way – for the most part – that Russia responded to the global financial crash of 2008.
*NASHI – a 100,000 strong youth organisation started by Putin to support his party and aims. It can be pretty heavy handed at times and the book describes the experience of a British ambassador who was harassed by them.
*Putin’s restructuring of the processes of voting for regional government, so that he had much more control over who runs the country, at all levels.
*Cronyism. Time and time again Putin puts his friends in power.
*Putin’s efforts to get more Russian control of its natural resources, lessening the degree to which the West could invest in these. Sometimes this investment-restructuring was done in a questionable way, and created international mistrust about the safety of investing in Russia.
*The way the Russian economy depends on its natural resources, rather than the manufacturing sector. It is not often you see things labelled "Made in Russia."
* Russia suddenly stopping oil and gas supplies to Eastern Europe, as a political ploy, causing mayhem. Russia deemed a very risky (but necessary) supplier of natural resources.
*Putin’s efforts to invest abroad, particularly his efforts to get a controlling stake in some major companies. These efforts are thwarted.
*Murders. Lots of them. Journalists. Lawyers. Anyone who opposes the government. Probably done mostly by the FSB (the re-vamped KGB.) Putin used to work for both organisations.
*Crackdowns on the large number of NGOs in Russia with support from abroad. Putin thinks they are major examples of the West infiltrating Russia.
* How various foreign companies have experienced corruption in Russia.
“The World Bank publishes an annual survey in which it ranks 183 countries of the world according to ‘ease of doing business’. In 2011 Russia came in at 123 – far behind other post-Soviet states..... “
“Between 2008 and 2009 the average size of a bribe in Russia nearly tripled – according to an interior ministry report – to more than $776 (American dollars)..... By July 2010, according to the same official body, the average bribe had reached $1,500, and by July 2011 the incredible sum of $10,000.”
*Spies. Russian and American ones. I had no idea they were so ubiquitous, and such an accepted part of international relations!
All in all this was a marvellous book. I have one criticism – and it is not for this book alone..... I think all dates given incompletely ought to have the year in brackets after the month. For instance one paragraph will mention January 2008 – then a few pages on the book will say “in April”, then a page or so after that it will say “in November”. Please can we have instead “in April (2008)” and then “in November (2008).” It is really difficult to keep tabs on dates with all these free floating months just hanging around, sometimes with several pages between them. Especially when the years mentioned do not always follow on consecutively....
March 21, 2022
In aceste momente când Ucraina este atacata de armata lui Putin iar războiul este la granița noastră mi am dorit să înțeleg motivele ce stau in spatele acestui război și ce l a determinat pe Putin sa atace o țară vecina, frați practic, o țară fosta URSS care tinde spre modernizare și democrație. Aceasta carte mi a lămurit o parte din întrebări și o recomand oricui este interesat de Rusia contemporană din perspectivă occidentală. Autorul este mai mult decât calificat să scrie despre Rusia – după ce a lucrat atât la The Sunday Times, cât și la BBC în calitate de corespondent la Moscova. De asemenea, a fost o perioadă consilier în biroul de presă al Kremlinului. Are un stil de scriere minunat, multe informații complexe sunt prezentate clar și foarte interesant.
Primul capitol oferă o analiză foarte bună despre Rusia sub Boris Elțin - în anii haotici, înspăimântători și sălbatici ai anilor 1990.
De acolo, cartea trece la Vladimir Putin – președintele cu o mână de fier care încearcă să păstreze controlul asupra mafiei puternice a oligarhilor, asupra vastelor resurse naturale ale Rusiei – în special gaze și petrol, și să lege legături cu America și Marea Britanie. Sub conducerea sa, cea mai mare slăbiciune a Rusiei a continuat să înflorească: corupția care se regăsește de la cel mai mic până la cel mai înalt nivel.
,,Cele două fețe ale lui Putin,,
Evenimentele descrise în acest capitol, reducerea la tăcere a presei, instituirea „verticalei puterii“, numirea acoliților lui Putin în funcții-cheie, războiul din Cecenia, reacția dură la scufundarea submarinului Kursk, îmblânzirea oligarhilor și persecutarea lui Hodorkovski, toate acestea au avut efecte revelatoare asupra occidentalilor care se hotărâseră încă de la început să facă afaceri cu Putin. Omul care își întindea mâna către liderii occidentali și implementa reforme economice bine-venite în țară, nu se dezmințea, confirmându-și propria zicală: „Cekist rămâi până la moarte“,
In cele 2 mandate ale sale, Putin a reușit să aducă țara la nivelul dinainte de 1990, in care libertatea presei nu mai exista, totul este controlat, cuvinele libertate și democrație nu există în mintea acestui om.
După ce a invadat Cecenia și armata sa a comis numeroase atrocități, au început represaliile extremiștilor ceceni prin acte de terorism in Rusia iar reacția lui Putin a fost una halucinantă, dând vina pe Occident pentru cele întâmplate.
,, Putin dădea o turnură complet nouă atacului terorist. Nu a menționat deloc brutalitatea propriilor forțe în Cecenia,factorul principal care stătea în spatele tuturor actelor de terorism interne. De fapt, nici măcar nu a menționat cuvântul Cecenia, ci a dat în schimb vina pe Occident."
Când Ucraina și a exprimat dorința de a adera la NATO, Putin și a ieșit complet din minți și a reacționat pe măsură, oprind alimentarea cu gaz a Ucrainei.
,,Evenimentele petrecute la Kiev, la sfârșitul lui 2004, au provocat furie la Kremlin...Putin (la fel ca mulți dintre ruși) o privea ca pe o simplă extensie a Rusiei...Ce e Ucraina? O parte din teritoriul său se află în Europa de Est, dar cea mai mare parte este un dar de la noi“. O parte, peninsula Crimeea, chiar fusese un dar transmis prin decret de Rusia Ucrainei, de către fostul lider sovietic Nikita Hrușciov.....toată țara era un mare bloc prin care treceau multe dintre legăturile strategice dintre Rusia și Europa – conductele de petrol și gaze, rețeaua de electricitate,autostrăzile militare –, în plus, reprezenta ultimul tampon dintre Rusia și tot mai extinsa Alianță Nord-Atlantică. Și totuși, omul care urma să fie președinte aici, Viktor Iușcenko, cu soția lui americană, vorbea despre aderarea la NATO! ....În cazul Ucrainei, Putin avea să facă tot posibilul pentru a pune capăta cestui nonsens."
Iată motivele și înverșunarea lui în a porni războiul contra Ucrainei, după aproape 20 de ani, timp in care și a pregătit orice mișcare și a planificat totul până în cele mai mici detalii. Ne mirăm de ce se întâmplă și credem că este un dement ( cu siguranță este) dar totul e planificat demult .
Primul capitol oferă o analiză foarte bună despre Rusia sub Boris Elțin - în anii haotici, înspăimântători și sălbatici ai anilor 1990.
De acolo, cartea trece la Vladimir Putin – președintele cu o mână de fier care încearcă să păstreze controlul asupra mafiei puternice a oligarhilor, asupra vastelor resurse naturale ale Rusiei – în special gaze și petrol, și să lege legături cu America și Marea Britanie. Sub conducerea sa, cea mai mare slăbiciune a Rusiei a continuat să înflorească: corupția care se regăsește de la cel mai mic până la cel mai înalt nivel.
,,Cele două fețe ale lui Putin,,
Evenimentele descrise în acest capitol, reducerea la tăcere a presei, instituirea „verticalei puterii“, numirea acoliților lui Putin în funcții-cheie, războiul din Cecenia, reacția dură la scufundarea submarinului Kursk, îmblânzirea oligarhilor și persecutarea lui Hodorkovski, toate acestea au avut efecte revelatoare asupra occidentalilor care se hotărâseră încă de la început să facă afaceri cu Putin. Omul care își întindea mâna către liderii occidentali și implementa reforme economice bine-venite în țară, nu se dezmințea, confirmându-și propria zicală: „Cekist rămâi până la moarte“,
In cele 2 mandate ale sale, Putin a reușit să aducă țara la nivelul dinainte de 1990, in care libertatea presei nu mai exista, totul este controlat, cuvinele libertate și democrație nu există în mintea acestui om.
După ce a invadat Cecenia și armata sa a comis numeroase atrocități, au început represaliile extremiștilor ceceni prin acte de terorism in Rusia iar reacția lui Putin a fost una halucinantă, dând vina pe Occident pentru cele întâmplate.
,, Putin dădea o turnură complet nouă atacului terorist. Nu a menționat deloc brutalitatea propriilor forțe în Cecenia,factorul principal care stătea în spatele tuturor actelor de terorism interne. De fapt, nici măcar nu a menționat cuvântul Cecenia, ci a dat în schimb vina pe Occident."
Când Ucraina și a exprimat dorința de a adera la NATO, Putin și a ieșit complet din minți și a reacționat pe măsură, oprind alimentarea cu gaz a Ucrainei.
,,Evenimentele petrecute la Kiev, la sfârșitul lui 2004, au provocat furie la Kremlin...Putin (la fel ca mulți dintre ruși) o privea ca pe o simplă extensie a Rusiei...Ce e Ucraina? O parte din teritoriul său se află în Europa de Est, dar cea mai mare parte este un dar de la noi“. O parte, peninsula Crimeea, chiar fusese un dar transmis prin decret de Rusia Ucrainei, de către fostul lider sovietic Nikita Hrușciov.....toată țara era un mare bloc prin care treceau multe dintre legăturile strategice dintre Rusia și Europa – conductele de petrol și gaze, rețeaua de electricitate,autostrăzile militare –, în plus, reprezenta ultimul tampon dintre Rusia și tot mai extinsa Alianță Nord-Atlantică. Și totuși, omul care urma să fie președinte aici, Viktor Iușcenko, cu soția lui americană, vorbea despre aderarea la NATO! ....În cazul Ucrainei, Putin avea să facă tot posibilul pentru a pune capăta cestui nonsens."
Iată motivele și înverșunarea lui în a porni războiul contra Ucrainei, după aproape 20 de ani, timp in care și a pregătit orice mișcare și a planificat totul până în cele mai mici detalii. Ne mirăm de ce se întâmplă și credem că este un dement ( cu siguranță este) dar totul e planificat demult .
January 8, 2013
As the author acknowledges at the end of his book, he was hoping, after the transformation of the Soviet Union to Russia during the late 1980’s – early 1990’s, to be writing a far more positive assessment after the elapse of twenty years. This political biography, to a large extent, is a searing indictment of Russia and of Vladimir Putin. With Putin at the helm for another 12 years there seems little hope for Russia to become liberal, open, and democratic.
As Mr. Roxburgh ably demonstrates Putin has promoted his personality cult through his Nashi youth organization; he disdains debate and humiliates and imprisons any form of opposition (like Khodorkovsky); journalists have been executed in the streets of Moscow with no valid investigation (Anna Politkovskaya is just one sad and tragic example).
Not only has Putin not understood democracy, he has failed to comprehend the newly established sovereignty of the liberated states (Poland, Estonia, Ukraine and many more) that were for so long under Soviet suzerainty.
In many ways the new Russia is a paper tiger masquerading as a super-power. It has shrunk in size, its many new neighbours disdain and fear it, which is why many have joined NATO. Russia is currently ranked in position 143 in corruption in the Transparency International website. Many Third World countries are considered less corrupt like Pakistan, Sierra Leone and Ethiopia.
The mafia permeates all areas of society – and the discrepancy between the super-rich and the poor is increasing. Russia manufactures little and the business community is impeded by a wall of bureaucracy – Mr. Roxburgh gives an example of IKEA where 300 separate permits were required – translated as bribes. All of these problems have increased under Putin. Sadly the future for Russia looks grim indeed.
We gain a both a perspective on Russia and Vladimir Putin, but don’t to this book for insights into Putin’s personal life. We do gain a comprehension of Russia’s recent history under a would-be Czar.
As Mr. Roxburgh ably demonstrates Putin has promoted his personality cult through his Nashi youth organization; he disdains debate and humiliates and imprisons any form of opposition (like Khodorkovsky); journalists have been executed in the streets of Moscow with no valid investigation (Anna Politkovskaya is just one sad and tragic example).
Not only has Putin not understood democracy, he has failed to comprehend the newly established sovereignty of the liberated states (Poland, Estonia, Ukraine and many more) that were for so long under Soviet suzerainty.
In many ways the new Russia is a paper tiger masquerading as a super-power. It has shrunk in size, its many new neighbours disdain and fear it, which is why many have joined NATO. Russia is currently ranked in position 143 in corruption in the Transparency International website. Many Third World countries are considered less corrupt like Pakistan, Sierra Leone and Ethiopia.
The mafia permeates all areas of society – and the discrepancy between the super-rich and the poor is increasing. Russia manufactures little and the business community is impeded by a wall of bureaucracy – Mr. Roxburgh gives an example of IKEA where 300 separate permits were required – translated as bribes. All of these problems have increased under Putin. Sadly the future for Russia looks grim indeed.
We gain a both a perspective on Russia and Vladimir Putin, but don’t to this book for insights into Putin’s personal life. We do gain a comprehension of Russia’s recent history under a would-be Czar.
August 2, 2014
I enjoyed this book so throughly, I was sad when I finished it and that is something I've never experienced with a modern history/political science book. I suspect there are a few reasons for this:
The subject matter is compelling: Putin is a character that everyone seems to spend a lot of time analyzing. He is so magnificent in shielding his intentions that it seems no one can easily anticipate his reactions unless they are Medvedev or an Ivanov and even these guys must sometimes wonder. I was also struck by the many times he met with people and those people came out thinking he was just like them. This is often attributed to Putin's ability to mirror others and why a Kremlin journalist, Yelena Tregubova describes him as a, "...a virtuoso....able to reflect like a mirror the person he is with, to make them believe he is just like them. He does this so cleverly that his counterpart apparently doesn't notice it but just feels great" (Roxburgh, 10) We are all familiar with how George W. Bush looked into Putin's eyes after all and felt he had seen his soul. This happened after a long discussion with Putin in which Putin told W how he had found the cross his mother had given him after his Dascha had burned down - as if it was meant to be. Bush really fell for it. I bet I would too (but not over a cross - probably over his dogs).
Roxburgh is a fantastic writer and he elucidates facts with panache. Consider this paragraph about how the Americans and Russians felt about Ukraine but how it was really different from both of their perspectives:
Most importantly, the book presents, what seems to me, an evidenced base and fair balanced account of the post Yeltsin years, the very real fears Russia had of the West and the terrible misunderstandings between the leaders. I enjoyed learning about Medvedev and Ivanov as well and the details of meetings with Rice and Bush, especially the detail of how Merkel and Rice hammered out a NATO compromise with various former Soviet states at a meeting (and all in Russian). To me it appeared that these two women accomplished more than their male counterparts had in months!
I also appreciated the honest presentation of Russia - its struggle for democracy, the way many felt that a strongman was a good thing and worth compromising on freedoms and especially how Russia is so corrupt and that corruption spoils its chances for becoming a much stronger economic power.
Of course there is all the interesting intrigue: the British "spy rock", the poisoning of Litvinenko, the strange youth movements around Putin, Putin's personality cults, the terrible shootings of journalists, the PR blunders, Putin's misunderstandings of how the West works (its courts, its journalists).
1. Roxburgh, Angus. "Courting the West." The strongman: Vladimir Putin and the struggle for Russia. London: I.B. Tauris, 2013. . Print.
2. Roxburgh, Angus. "Enemies Everywhere." The strongman: Vladimir Putin and the struggle for Russia. London: I.B. Tauris, 2013. . Print.
The subject matter is compelling: Putin is a character that everyone seems to spend a lot of time analyzing. He is so magnificent in shielding his intentions that it seems no one can easily anticipate his reactions unless they are Medvedev or an Ivanov and even these guys must sometimes wonder. I was also struck by the many times he met with people and those people came out thinking he was just like them. This is often attributed to Putin's ability to mirror others and why a Kremlin journalist, Yelena Tregubova describes him as a, "...a virtuoso....able to reflect like a mirror the person he is with, to make them believe he is just like them. He does this so cleverly that his counterpart apparently doesn't notice it but just feels great" (Roxburgh, 10) We are all familiar with how George W. Bush looked into Putin's eyes after all and felt he had seen his soul. This happened after a long discussion with Putin in which Putin told W how he had found the cross his mother had given him after his Dascha had burned down - as if it was meant to be. Bush really fell for it. I bet I would too (but not over a cross - probably over his dogs).
Roxburgh is a fantastic writer and he elucidates facts with panache. Consider this paragraph about how the Americans and Russians felt about Ukraine but how it was really different from both of their perspectives:
In fact, both the Russians and the Americans underplayed the most important thing – that Ukraine is a finely balanced entity, divided and pulled in many directions. There is a linguistic split between Russian and Ukrainian speakers, a religious divide between Orthodox and Catholic Christians; there are those who pine for the old days (more security, less tension, less corruption, little ethnic strife) and those who want to move on (openness, democracy, free enterprise); there are Ukrainian nationalists and ethnic Russians – distributed across an imprecise geographical ‘east–west’ divide. Opinion polls did not show an overwhelming desire across the country for NATO membership, although joining the EU was more popular. The family ties of which Putin spoke were real. But at the same time this was not the same Ukraine that was once part of the Soviet ‘family’; it had developed for 13 years already as a separate entity, and a new identity was growing. The use of the Ukrainian language was far more widespread than it was in Soviet days when I once embarrassed the head of the Ukrainian Communist Party, Vladimir Shcherbitsky, by asking him what language was used at Ukrainian central committee meetings. There was a new pride in the nation, and an awareness that economically, at least, they would be far better to tie their future to the West than to the semi-reformed and corrupt economy of Russia. (Roxburgh, 25)
Most importantly, the book presents, what seems to me, an evidenced base and fair balanced account of the post Yeltsin years, the very real fears Russia had of the West and the terrible misunderstandings between the leaders. I enjoyed learning about Medvedev and Ivanov as well and the details of meetings with Rice and Bush, especially the detail of how Merkel and Rice hammered out a NATO compromise with various former Soviet states at a meeting (and all in Russian). To me it appeared that these two women accomplished more than their male counterparts had in months!
I also appreciated the honest presentation of Russia - its struggle for democracy, the way many felt that a strongman was a good thing and worth compromising on freedoms and especially how Russia is so corrupt and that corruption spoils its chances for becoming a much stronger economic power.
Of course there is all the interesting intrigue: the British "spy rock", the poisoning of Litvinenko, the strange youth movements around Putin, Putin's personality cults, the terrible shootings of journalists, the PR blunders, Putin's misunderstandings of how the West works (its courts, its journalists).
1. Roxburgh, Angus. "Courting the West." The strongman: Vladimir Putin and the struggle for Russia. London: I.B. Tauris, 2013. . Print.
2. Roxburgh, Angus. "Enemies Everywhere." The strongman: Vladimir Putin and the struggle for Russia. London: I.B. Tauris, 2013. . Print.
January 11, 2023
Britain's veteran Russia specialist, Angus Roxburgh, offers a mature, reasoned, and experienced Western view of Putin and Putinism. It serves as a necessary counterpoint to the incessant demonizing of both emanating from the United States and UK - especially necessary at this time of sabre-rattling postures. Roxburgh's is the kind of voice being deliberately cast aside as old traditions of Russia-bashing are revived (see David Fogelsong's "The American Mission and the `Evil Empire': The Crusade for a `Free Russia' Since 1881.") In contrast to the bellicose paranoia emanating from Western capitals Roxburgh bids us to stand back and look at the world not just from Putin's view, but that of Russia itself. For 30 years the West has followed a self-interested agenda to simultaneously remold and contain the "New" Russia, as if said adjective was merely a supporting prop. The current impasse is the result.
Roxburgh recounts the Western "forked tongue" over NATO expansion eastward, which stands behind the current angst. But he shies short from connecting some of the dots. The Latvian president's tear-jerking ode to her country's freedom from Russian domination at the Prague summit of 2002 (p. 97) left many Russian eyes dry, as they recalled the two Latvian SS divisions that served Nazi occupiers in the Third Reich's thrust toward Moscow. The Kremlin denouncing of "Ukrainian fascists" who have taken over Kiev hearken to the same bloody memories, still willfully ignored by the West as it seemingly patronizes groups precisely for their anti-Moscow militance.
Roxburgh is also, I feel, being disingenuous when he wonders why post-communist Russia has not "turned itself into a thriving manufacturing country like China or many other developing economies" (p. 283). He seems unaware that Russia is not a developing country, but an old developed economy whose industries were of the same rust-belt generation as the mills, mines, and factories of Youngstown or Pittsburgh. The thrust of "economic reform" was thus to dump old industrial investment for new finance-driven capitalism, exactly as in the old-money West - with the added inducement that Russia's modernization was further hamstrung by bans on new-technology sales to Moscow. This policy is far from dead, as new sanctions try to keep Russia from acquiring the very technology required to continue its competitive place in the world market in the name of "European security."
I also disagree with Roxburgh's take that Russian reform has always "come from above." The Tzar's granting of a Duma in 1906, and initiating land reforms, was inspired solely to quell the revolutionary movement of the streets and villages. Similarly, the Russian revolution re-erupting in February, 1917, was a perfect parallel to Egypt's Arab Spring as a groundswell of street activism, bringing down two governments within a year. But it's true that Putin has rolled back much of the glasnost era, when Russian liberty seemed to have arrived into its own at last. Two points here: Yeltsin was not the "democrat" the West made him out to be, as Roxburgh accurately recalls, but an authoritarian predecessor for all that it now objects to in Putin. Secondly, Yeltsin's entourage was composed not only of Democratic Russia liberals, but entrenched apparatchiks who hated Gorbachev, who abandoned the old CP because it was no longer theirs - like Yeltsin himself. Mouthing democratic phrases was a small price to pay for access to Western loot. The rise of Putin in 2000 demonstrated the final eclipse of the liberal DemRossiya wing of Yeltsin's movement. It has been a downhill slide since, but with equal responsibility from a self-serving West.
Putin's role, as he sees it, is not to reconstruct the Soviet empire, but the old mantra of "Great Russia, One and Indivisible." Western fuming over the return of the USSR is a pretext for NATO missiles in Ukraine. Though Putin resembles another "strongman", the former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic, the West cannot bomb Putin to the negotiating table without the direst consequences. Western leaders know this and hope economic strangulation will suffice for targeted collateral droning, but without regard as to what a "failed Russia" actually entails. Any option other than diplomacy and recognizing Russian interests - as Kennedy did during the Missile Crisis over Cuba - is prelude to disaster.
Roxburgh recounts the Western "forked tongue" over NATO expansion eastward, which stands behind the current angst. But he shies short from connecting some of the dots. The Latvian president's tear-jerking ode to her country's freedom from Russian domination at the Prague summit of 2002 (p. 97) left many Russian eyes dry, as they recalled the two Latvian SS divisions that served Nazi occupiers in the Third Reich's thrust toward Moscow. The Kremlin denouncing of "Ukrainian fascists" who have taken over Kiev hearken to the same bloody memories, still willfully ignored by the West as it seemingly patronizes groups precisely for their anti-Moscow militance.
Roxburgh is also, I feel, being disingenuous when he wonders why post-communist Russia has not "turned itself into a thriving manufacturing country like China or many other developing economies" (p. 283). He seems unaware that Russia is not a developing country, but an old developed economy whose industries were of the same rust-belt generation as the mills, mines, and factories of Youngstown or Pittsburgh. The thrust of "economic reform" was thus to dump old industrial investment for new finance-driven capitalism, exactly as in the old-money West - with the added inducement that Russia's modernization was further hamstrung by bans on new-technology sales to Moscow. This policy is far from dead, as new sanctions try to keep Russia from acquiring the very technology required to continue its competitive place in the world market in the name of "European security."
I also disagree with Roxburgh's take that Russian reform has always "come from above." The Tzar's granting of a Duma in 1906, and initiating land reforms, was inspired solely to quell the revolutionary movement of the streets and villages. Similarly, the Russian revolution re-erupting in February, 1917, was a perfect parallel to Egypt's Arab Spring as a groundswell of street activism, bringing down two governments within a year. But it's true that Putin has rolled back much of the glasnost era, when Russian liberty seemed to have arrived into its own at last. Two points here: Yeltsin was not the "democrat" the West made him out to be, as Roxburgh accurately recalls, but an authoritarian predecessor for all that it now objects to in Putin. Secondly, Yeltsin's entourage was composed not only of Democratic Russia liberals, but entrenched apparatchiks who hated Gorbachev, who abandoned the old CP because it was no longer theirs - like Yeltsin himself. Mouthing democratic phrases was a small price to pay for access to Western loot. The rise of Putin in 2000 demonstrated the final eclipse of the liberal DemRossiya wing of Yeltsin's movement. It has been a downhill slide since, but with equal responsibility from a self-serving West.
Putin's role, as he sees it, is not to reconstruct the Soviet empire, but the old mantra of "Great Russia, One and Indivisible." Western fuming over the return of the USSR is a pretext for NATO missiles in Ukraine. Though Putin resembles another "strongman", the former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic, the West cannot bomb Putin to the negotiating table without the direst consequences. Western leaders know this and hope economic strangulation will suffice for targeted collateral droning, but without regard as to what a "failed Russia" actually entails. Any option other than diplomacy and recognizing Russian interests - as Kennedy did during the Missile Crisis over Cuba - is prelude to disaster.
March 27, 2012
Seemingly balanced and well researched. Readable and engaging. I didn't want to put this book down, which is a weird thing to say about a poli-sci book.
August 11, 2014
A great insight to Putin his ideology and stance. Read this before the Ukraine uprising and from this book you just knew how Putin would react.
November 27, 2022
Struggle against American hegemony in East Europe ('siloviki' vs. 'neo-cons').
POSTES AT AMAZON 2014
While I was reading, news announced end of South Stream pipeline project, refusal of Mistral ship delivery, more NATO presence in Eastern Europe, more economic sanctions and endless fighting/fiscal Ukrainian crisis...saga continues.
What we get from Angus Roxburgh, is great re-examination of all undertakings (including military aggressions) that have been initiated by Putin and his government, since the beginning of XXI century. Also the value of this publication is in showing how Washington operated and operates against Russia today, either directly or behind the scenes, affecting relations between Russia and its neighbors.
People who follow American interventions around the globe, know exactly Bush's speeches and Obama's lectures. We know little about Putin's, and here is an opportunity to learn.
From the pages it is clear: Putin actions were not always the best, sometimes even dumb and harsh. However considering how hard USA long sticky hands tried (and still try using EU vassals) to export 'western' idealism, corporate style system and military presence, it is not surprising that 'sleazy world of Russian corporate business' has been developed and reinforced in response.
Russia is not a perfect place, but neither the States, both countries being full of corruption, though the structure of it is different.
In general, "Strongman" reads well, but some parts are less interesting, not convincing or coherent (for example Putin and Medvedev expensive watches- allusion to them supporting corruption, or Pussy Riot trial). Good side of the coin is, I sense, that author understands Russia more than it seems from his writing. Recommended.
POSTES AT AMAZON 2014
While I was reading, news announced end of South Stream pipeline project, refusal of Mistral ship delivery, more NATO presence in Eastern Europe, more economic sanctions and endless fighting/fiscal Ukrainian crisis...saga continues.
What we get from Angus Roxburgh, is great re-examination of all undertakings (including military aggressions) that have been initiated by Putin and his government, since the beginning of XXI century. Also the value of this publication is in showing how Washington operated and operates against Russia today, either directly or behind the scenes, affecting relations between Russia and its neighbors.
People who follow American interventions around the globe, know exactly Bush's speeches and Obama's lectures. We know little about Putin's, and here is an opportunity to learn.
From the pages it is clear: Putin actions were not always the best, sometimes even dumb and harsh. However considering how hard USA long sticky hands tried (and still try using EU vassals) to export 'western' idealism, corporate style system and military presence, it is not surprising that 'sleazy world of Russian corporate business' has been developed and reinforced in response.
Russia is not a perfect place, but neither the States, both countries being full of corruption, though the structure of it is different.
In general, "Strongman" reads well, but some parts are less interesting, not convincing or coherent (for example Putin and Medvedev expensive watches- allusion to them supporting corruption, or Pussy Riot trial). Good side of the coin is, I sense, that author understands Russia more than it seems from his writing. Recommended.
August 20, 2018
This book is odd. On one hand I pretty much despise the author and his massively cosmopolitan liberal esque thinking and how Russia basically needs this, but on the other it's still a good book with a great timeline and solid breadth of facts.
The author seems to flip flop on sides occasionally, but overall comes back to supporting the atlanticists. He also does weird time jumps back and forth (within an acceptable range) that are very distracting.
As a right winger I only grew to like Putin more as the book went on, obviously against the authors wishes, despite the corruption issue. This seems to be the main failing of Putin and Russia in general.
Overall, good book but slanted.
The author seems to flip flop on sides occasionally, but overall comes back to supporting the atlanticists. He also does weird time jumps back and forth (within an acceptable range) that are very distracting.
As a right winger I only grew to like Putin more as the book went on, obviously against the authors wishes, despite the corruption issue. This seems to be the main failing of Putin and Russia in general.
Overall, good book but slanted.
August 10, 2021
Atunci când dai mâna cu Vladimir Putin aproape că nici nu mai bagi de seamă dacă strângerea este fermă sau lejeră. Ceea ce te tulbură este privirea lui. Îşi apleacă capul, îndreptându-şi privirea în sus, către tine, şi te fixează câteva secunde bune, ca şi cum ar încerca să reţină fiecare detaliu sau poate doar să îţi potrivească chipul cu vreo fotografie memorată înainte… Este o privire aspră, pătrunzătoare, care te subjugă cu totul.
„Liderul naţional” al Rusiei nu se aseamănă cu niciun alt preşedinte sau premier din lume. La început, fostul spion KGB era oarecum reţinut şi stângaci, până când, în 1999, a fost propulsat pe neaşteptate pe culmile politicii. Cu timpul, a devenit o persoană fără inhibiţii, un om autoritar şi un narcisist care nu ratează nicio ocazie de a-şi etala forţa fizică în tot mai multe şedinţe fotografice. Putin, campionul de judo, Putin la comanda unui avion de luptă, pentru ca după 2008, când a trecut din scaunul de preşedinte în cel de prim-ministru, să înceapă să invite echipele de filmare în expediţii al căror unic scop era crearea unei imagini de star de cinema. A fost filmat în timp ce ataşa dispozitive de urmărire prin satelit urşilor polari, tigrilor, balenelor albe şi leoparzilor zăpezilor. Camerele de televiziune l-au surprins în timp ce înota în stil „fluture” într-un râu siberian rece ca gheaţa sau în timp ce călărea un cal pe culmile munţilor, la bustul gol şi cu ochelari de soare cu lentile negre. A stins personal incendii devastatoare, a condus snowmobile, motociclete şi maşini de Formula 1, a mers la schi şi scufundări, a jucat hochei pe gheaţă şi chiar a fredonat Blueberry Hill în engleză şi a cântat la pian în public ― fără să pară stânjenit de lipsa de talent pentru ambele activităţi. În august 2011, a avut grijă să aibă un cameraman în preajmă când a trebuit să se dezbrace la bustul gol în timpul unui control medical.
Ce alt lider din lume mai face aşa ceva? Una este să îşi încordeze muşchii în politică, însă, în privinţa vanităţii, nimeni nu-l întrece pe Vladimir Putin.
„Liderul naţional” al Rusiei nu se aseamănă cu niciun alt preşedinte sau premier din lume. La început, fostul spion KGB era oarecum reţinut şi stângaci, până când, în 1999, a fost propulsat pe neaşteptate pe culmile politicii. Cu timpul, a devenit o persoană fără inhibiţii, un om autoritar şi un narcisist care nu ratează nicio ocazie de a-şi etala forţa fizică în tot mai multe şedinţe fotografice. Putin, campionul de judo, Putin la comanda unui avion de luptă, pentru ca după 2008, când a trecut din scaunul de preşedinte în cel de prim-ministru, să înceapă să invite echipele de filmare în expediţii al căror unic scop era crearea unei imagini de star de cinema. A fost filmat în timp ce ataşa dispozitive de urmărire prin satelit urşilor polari, tigrilor, balenelor albe şi leoparzilor zăpezilor. Camerele de televiziune l-au surprins în timp ce înota în stil „fluture” într-un râu siberian rece ca gheaţa sau în timp ce călărea un cal pe culmile munţilor, la bustul gol şi cu ochelari de soare cu lentile negre. A stins personal incendii devastatoare, a condus snowmobile, motociclete şi maşini de Formula 1, a mers la schi şi scufundări, a jucat hochei pe gheaţă şi chiar a fredonat Blueberry Hill în engleză şi a cântat la pian în public ― fără să pară stânjenit de lipsa de talent pentru ambele activităţi. În august 2011, a avut grijă să aibă un cameraman în preajmă când a trebuit să se dezbrace la bustul gol în timpul unui control medical.
Ce alt lider din lume mai face aşa ceva? Una este să îşi încordeze muşchii în politică, însă, în privinţa vanităţii, nimeni nu-l întrece pe Vladimir Putin.
May 22, 2022
An excellent and highly readable account of Putin, his rise to power and the political intrigues which have followed that . The author documents what he sees as three stages in Putin's political persona. When first elected he cast himself as a reformer and sought to integrate Russia into the world both economically and politically. Putin Mark II and Mark III became progressively more autocratic and progressively more isolationist. Roxburgh charts what he sees as both the domestic and international context within which these moves took place. The book is a balanced look at multiple perspectives. Putin is never let off the hook for his actions, but the arrogance and mishandled political moves of the United States and its Western allies are also scathingly laid bare. Roxburgh has a long history of intimate contact with the political environment of Russia and is able to give an account rich in detail and personal anecdote. If you want to understand modern Russia, this book should be on your reading list.
July 13, 2016
Everyone must read this book who has a deep interest about Russia & Russia's politics with the leading part Vladimir Putin of course.
The fact is, that book certainly has got more potential thing about learning & recognizing Russia. It's a great book to know more details about Putin too.
Some phrase that randomly I can remember now from this book make me shiver in a positive rhythm.
"There's something eternal about Russia..."
"Putin has send by God to retain Russia in a strong position..."
& when Obama beginning to win the presidency election it was then that the writer (Angus Roxburgh) tried to explain Russian high officials to think of a new era about Russia-USA good relationships! What was the answer from Russia?
"Nothing will change. It's all the same people."
Worth saying - Universal Truth...
Long Live Russia - Long Live Putin...
The fact is, that book certainly has got more potential thing about learning & recognizing Russia. It's a great book to know more details about Putin too.
Some phrase that randomly I can remember now from this book make me shiver in a positive rhythm.
"There's something eternal about Russia..."
"Putin has send by God to retain Russia in a strong position..."
& when Obama beginning to win the presidency election it was then that the writer (Angus Roxburgh) tried to explain Russian high officials to think of a new era about Russia-USA good relationships! What was the answer from Russia?
"Nothing will change. It's all the same people."
Worth saying - Universal Truth...
Long Live Russia - Long Live Putin...
March 24, 2012
Book is a very readable description of Putin's first two terms as the Russian president and then the following term as prime minister.
April 23, 2013
One of the better expositions of contemporary Russian politics/attitudes. There's a bit of Western chauvinism that's grating, but, on the whole, far more idiotic books have been written.
April 6, 2022
Filled in alot of gaps. Very interesting first person accounts. Not sure if this is THE book on Putin through ~2011, but I think it’s a good one.
September 26, 2016
A manager at work—we were doing some idiotic back and forth trash talk—shushed me in public. Teasing him, I had said that the island of Malta had been first settled by English retards. He was Maltese. These days, no one likes to hear the word ‘retard’. It was lame, I know, but I retorted with a shout, “Shut up, this ain't Russia!” And standing directly behind me was a Russian emigrant, new to the country, who took offence at my reckless cliché. However, whether naive or not, he knew exactly to what I referred, that by worldwide reputation alone, even from the old USSR days, you couldn't any more voice your opinion in Russia than get a fresh loaf of bread from a government grocery store. I immediately apologized for my deleterious remark and offered my hand. Which he took. He seemed placated, if not bemused; no, I'm not saying he was an idiot, but the truth is, in Russia today, it is as dangerous to speak your mind as it was back in the USSR, maybe even more so, certainly more tricky. Where did he get the idea that I was misrepresenting the reputation of Russia’s culture? Freedom of the press, the right to assembly, the liberty to political free speech and individual property rights are all gone. And my very own angry Russian emigrant was too dumb or illiterate to know it, or he had unfounded and inexcusable nationalistic pride in his unsuccessful society. Nationalism does that. It makes you think in racist requisites: Russian better than Georgian, straight better than gay, male better than female, Christian better than Muslim. This is what you are morally permitted to say about your genetic heritage, “I am proud that I am Somali, Syrian or whoever. We’re the best people in the world!” Sure, and everybody has the greatest doctor. What is unacceptable to say as person from a failed country, is, “We’re the best nation in the world!” That’s like a Moslem or a Christian saying they’re the only true religion. And BTW, Americans should stop saying it as well. Like England, France, Ghana, Costa Rica, or Japan, they can say something like, “We are one of the greatest nations in the world and have proof with verifiable statistical facts; the bonafides!” And they could even explain why, but stop bragging that you’re the best; it’s annoying, Any nation who has to keep saying that they’re the best are not the best. American politicians actually mean, “We rule an empire and you don’t. So shut up!”
Well, anyway, as regards Russia, it is not like those rights were ever there—Western liberties I mean—not for the Autocrats’, Marxists’ nor Reformists’. Russia has never known any real freedom or democracy. Indeed, it may well be the least democratic place in the world. Not the ghost of freedom exists today. As I will explain in the plainest language, Russia is little more than a Mafia state with the homophobic Putin as the not so likeable Tony Soprano, ruling like both the Tsar and a don, and you’re not getting any special favours on the wedding day of his daughters; in fact, he’s divorced and you’re not invited!
Although not exactly book reviews, this article is chiefly concerned with six excellent and diverse books as sources: Darkness at Dawn, D Satter, The Putin Mystique, A Arutunyan, Strongman, A Roxburgh, The Man Without a Face, M Geesen, The New Nobility, A Soldatov and Putin’s Kleptocracy, K Dawisha. These works, and others, are all in general accord: the Putin regime runs a criminal state.
One of the first jobs of thugs is to convince people that they aren't bandits, that they’re marketers and their civil concerns are for the people—and that they’re like regular folks, only with more testosterone. It’s what philosophers say of the ethical disingenuous: “The appearance of morality is the price paid by hypocrites to look good to the ones they can fool.” So, one of the first jobs of the gangster class is to corrupt the police while appearing to the public to root out corruption from this very source. You do this by destroying the whistle-blowers. In the old gulag system, you jailed the dissidents, (i.e. the moral leaders of the country), now in present day Russia you get the free marketers for tax evasion, throw them in prison and steal their property; it’s win, win, win! Anybody who reports it, (journalists, accountants or lawyers), are going to prison for not having the paper work done for the paper-clips they claimed on their tax forms.
The World Bank publishes an annual survey in which it ranks 183 countries of the world according to ‘ease of doing business’. In 2011 Russia came in at 123 – far behind other post-Soviet states such as Georgia (at 19) and Kyrgyzstan (at 44). In terms of ‘dealing with construction permits’ Russia sits in 182nd place, ahead only of Eritrea. Dahlgren—(IKEA’s Russia manager, Lennart Dahlgren, came to Moscow in 1998 and stayed for eight years, battling with the authorities to open the first IKEA stores and ‘Mega malls’. He has since written his memoirs, Despite Absurdity)—wanted to arrange a meeting for IKEA’s owner – one of the wealthiest people in the world, and a man with great enthusiasm for doing business in Russia – with Putin. At first they palmed him off with meetings with a deputy prime minister. Then Dahlgren had an opportunity to discuss the proposal with someone from Putin’s entourage, who told him they didn't think IKEA would really want to have a meeting with Putin. Dahlgren writes: ‘I don’t know whether they meant it seriously or as a joke, but they said: “IKEA is penny-pinching, and the going rate for a meeting with Putin is 5 to 10 million dollars, which you will never pay.” (Quoted from, Strongman); see also the Corruption Index.
Today the lack of reliable contract law, unenforced and without an independent judiciary, has left Russia a complete gangster nation, and not like those American rappers sing about, but one that tens of millions of suffering Russians have to live with day in and out. (For this part see Putin’s Kleptocracy)
The Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti, FSB—Federal Security Service—had grown out of the KGB, Yeltsin had broken the KGB up and pit tax, communicate and security divisions against each other to help dismantle it, or at least in part to lessen its totalitarian power, but after consolidating his control, Putin has reunited them into the general security framework under the FSB or other agencies with no independence but to the executive. (For this part, see, Darkness at Dawn and The New Nobility)
Perhaps the most obvious and reactionary of all of Putin’s draconian measures, has been shutting down any and all independent news organizations. If this proved to be ineffective to shut up journalists, internal detractors or opposition politicians, he has had his critics imprisoned or permanently silenced. They don’t really even much hide it. He is personally, but indirectly linked to the murders of Anna Politkovskaya, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Sergei Yushenkov, Anatoly Sobchak and Alexander Litvinenko. See, List of Journalists killed/murdered in Russia. Under Putin’s rule there have been 30 to 35 (apparent) politically motivated murders of journalists. (For this part of the story see, The Man Without a Face).
Now as for the supreme leader with insatiable greed: “That is the biggest question. In a classical, absolutist monarchy, their chief patron would have been the sovereign, their king and country – which would have been the same thing. But Putin’s Russia, which has many of the trappings of an absolutist monarchy, refuses to see itself as such. The scholar Lilia Shevtsova has underlined the contradictions that this presents: Putin has preserved personified and undivided power, she writes. However, describing Yeltsin’s rule as ‘elected monarchy’ she applies the same metaphor to Putin’s rule, ‘accenting the contradictions between personified power and the elective method of legitimizing it.’ A maddening dissonance ensues: Putin had a theoretical option of ‘building a responsible system of governance based not [my italics] on the irrational and mystic power embodied in the leader but on the rule of law.’ But he either could not, or would not do so. Those words were written in 2004; by 2013 that dissonance has only grown, amid contradictory laws that fail to work and Putin’s constant calls to fight corruption. Why, despite yearly orders from Putin – his personal orders, harsh, determined and ominous – does corruption only grow?” (Quoted from, The Putin Mystique).
Now, I am more than happy to answer this question for everyone. It isn’t just Putin’s hidden assets, no, not the 40 to 70 billion dollars, making him one of the richest people in the world, which it is claimed he has amassed through old-fashioned brass-knuckled theft. It’s something that is hard for the North American or Western European democrat to really understand. It’s the tragic fault in the Russians themselves. To them, liberty is license, a free market is usually dangerous/entirely unfeasible, the press are myth makers/even outright liberal liars, and having sacrosanct private property rights are downright impossible in a country like Russia. Justice is with the Tsar, the motherland, the state itself: uberman, Uncle Joe or Putin, the Boss. For example, here’s some sense of how long in modern history there has been little perceived freedom: “…When it comes to this, [all men are created equal, except Negroes,] I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.” - Abraham Lincoln. 1855. (Quote taken from, The Putin Mystique).
So you see, they've been without freedom for some time, and in fact, the society itself does not give it the same value as in the West. Yes Marxist terrorists hijacked a thriving modern industrialized state, but the Tsarist regime was as ridiculous on its face with serfdom as the communist one was with their countrywide gulag slave system. People went marching to their sentences at the direction of a monarch’s clerk or a Bolshevik’s commissar like the Jews at the direction of a Nazi official. What’s to say to this? Idea and Culture are intimately connected and some cultures are impeded compared to the top democracies, and many failed states call themselves democracies, but of course, this is pure piffle. Yes, you nationalists from failed or failing countries, like my very own angry Russian emigrant, it has got nothing to do with blood! It is brains alone that count; it’s how one organizes society, the proper protection of human rights, an independent judicial branch of government, the separation of powers, free elections and all those splendid creations of the democracies throughout history, despite its many intellectual enemies like Putin, the KGB and the Marxists, (of course, the Religionists are right up there at the top as bitter foes to liberty as well).
In the decade of Putin, the FSB has portrayed themselves in propaganda films like The Special Department as they wanted themselves to be seen, (see, The New Nobility), just as the CIA does in America. Behind the FSB’s rapid growth of power with the ascension of Putin, they have been just as ineffective at fighting terrorism as the CIA. And in regards to upholding an independent judiciary, curbing the mafia-state rising right underneath their feet or bringing real culprits to justice, they have utterly failed, as the KGB did before them. They are lap dogs, a whitewash to Putin’s tarnished throne. They have become another arm of the bandit state, but don’t say, “Poor pitiful Russia!” Nobody is free without effort. The Russian masses' romantic attraction to the state is deplorable and always has been. The people have quietly marched to their passing in absolutely frightening numbers, either with demise by alcoholism or death by authoritarianism. Shame on the Russian Orthodox Church, Russian Nationalists and the Russian Communists, all preaching against democracy like an Iranian Ayatollah. The Great Satan be damned! There is a person for this epithet and his name is Vladimir Putin, and never forget that germ of truth from that old Russian saw, “Half the population is behind bars and the other half are guarding them.”
For the more than 50 links to sources, see, http://eastamant.com/article.php?arti..., "This Ain't Russia".
Well, anyway, as regards Russia, it is not like those rights were ever there—Western liberties I mean—not for the Autocrats’, Marxists’ nor Reformists’. Russia has never known any real freedom or democracy. Indeed, it may well be the least democratic place in the world. Not the ghost of freedom exists today. As I will explain in the plainest language, Russia is little more than a Mafia state with the homophobic Putin as the not so likeable Tony Soprano, ruling like both the Tsar and a don, and you’re not getting any special favours on the wedding day of his daughters; in fact, he’s divorced and you’re not invited!
Although not exactly book reviews, this article is chiefly concerned with six excellent and diverse books as sources: Darkness at Dawn, D Satter, The Putin Mystique, A Arutunyan, Strongman, A Roxburgh, The Man Without a Face, M Geesen, The New Nobility, A Soldatov and Putin’s Kleptocracy, K Dawisha. These works, and others, are all in general accord: the Putin regime runs a criminal state.
One of the first jobs of thugs is to convince people that they aren't bandits, that they’re marketers and their civil concerns are for the people—and that they’re like regular folks, only with more testosterone. It’s what philosophers say of the ethical disingenuous: “The appearance of morality is the price paid by hypocrites to look good to the ones they can fool.” So, one of the first jobs of the gangster class is to corrupt the police while appearing to the public to root out corruption from this very source. You do this by destroying the whistle-blowers. In the old gulag system, you jailed the dissidents, (i.e. the moral leaders of the country), now in present day Russia you get the free marketers for tax evasion, throw them in prison and steal their property; it’s win, win, win! Anybody who reports it, (journalists, accountants or lawyers), are going to prison for not having the paper work done for the paper-clips they claimed on their tax forms.
The World Bank publishes an annual survey in which it ranks 183 countries of the world according to ‘ease of doing business’. In 2011 Russia came in at 123 – far behind other post-Soviet states such as Georgia (at 19) and Kyrgyzstan (at 44). In terms of ‘dealing with construction permits’ Russia sits in 182nd place, ahead only of Eritrea. Dahlgren—(IKEA’s Russia manager, Lennart Dahlgren, came to Moscow in 1998 and stayed for eight years, battling with the authorities to open the first IKEA stores and ‘Mega malls’. He has since written his memoirs, Despite Absurdity)—wanted to arrange a meeting for IKEA’s owner – one of the wealthiest people in the world, and a man with great enthusiasm for doing business in Russia – with Putin. At first they palmed him off with meetings with a deputy prime minister. Then Dahlgren had an opportunity to discuss the proposal with someone from Putin’s entourage, who told him they didn't think IKEA would really want to have a meeting with Putin. Dahlgren writes: ‘I don’t know whether they meant it seriously or as a joke, but they said: “IKEA is penny-pinching, and the going rate for a meeting with Putin is 5 to 10 million dollars, which you will never pay.” (Quoted from, Strongman); see also the Corruption Index.
Today the lack of reliable contract law, unenforced and without an independent judiciary, has left Russia a complete gangster nation, and not like those American rappers sing about, but one that tens of millions of suffering Russians have to live with day in and out. (For this part see Putin’s Kleptocracy)
The Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti, FSB—Federal Security Service—had grown out of the KGB, Yeltsin had broken the KGB up and pit tax, communicate and security divisions against each other to help dismantle it, or at least in part to lessen its totalitarian power, but after consolidating his control, Putin has reunited them into the general security framework under the FSB or other agencies with no independence but to the executive. (For this part, see, Darkness at Dawn and The New Nobility)
Perhaps the most obvious and reactionary of all of Putin’s draconian measures, has been shutting down any and all independent news organizations. If this proved to be ineffective to shut up journalists, internal detractors or opposition politicians, he has had his critics imprisoned or permanently silenced. They don’t really even much hide it. He is personally, but indirectly linked to the murders of Anna Politkovskaya, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Sergei Yushenkov, Anatoly Sobchak and Alexander Litvinenko. See, List of Journalists killed/murdered in Russia. Under Putin’s rule there have been 30 to 35 (apparent) politically motivated murders of journalists. (For this part of the story see, The Man Without a Face).
Now as for the supreme leader with insatiable greed: “That is the biggest question. In a classical, absolutist monarchy, their chief patron would have been the sovereign, their king and country – which would have been the same thing. But Putin’s Russia, which has many of the trappings of an absolutist monarchy, refuses to see itself as such. The scholar Lilia Shevtsova has underlined the contradictions that this presents: Putin has preserved personified and undivided power, she writes. However, describing Yeltsin’s rule as ‘elected monarchy’ she applies the same metaphor to Putin’s rule, ‘accenting the contradictions between personified power and the elective method of legitimizing it.’ A maddening dissonance ensues: Putin had a theoretical option of ‘building a responsible system of governance based not [my italics] on the irrational and mystic power embodied in the leader but on the rule of law.’ But he either could not, or would not do so. Those words were written in 2004; by 2013 that dissonance has only grown, amid contradictory laws that fail to work and Putin’s constant calls to fight corruption. Why, despite yearly orders from Putin – his personal orders, harsh, determined and ominous – does corruption only grow?” (Quoted from, The Putin Mystique).
Now, I am more than happy to answer this question for everyone. It isn’t just Putin’s hidden assets, no, not the 40 to 70 billion dollars, making him one of the richest people in the world, which it is claimed he has amassed through old-fashioned brass-knuckled theft. It’s something that is hard for the North American or Western European democrat to really understand. It’s the tragic fault in the Russians themselves. To them, liberty is license, a free market is usually dangerous/entirely unfeasible, the press are myth makers/even outright liberal liars, and having sacrosanct private property rights are downright impossible in a country like Russia. Justice is with the Tsar, the motherland, the state itself: uberman, Uncle Joe or Putin, the Boss. For example, here’s some sense of how long in modern history there has been little perceived freedom: “…When it comes to this, [all men are created equal, except Negroes,] I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.” - Abraham Lincoln. 1855. (Quote taken from, The Putin Mystique).
So you see, they've been without freedom for some time, and in fact, the society itself does not give it the same value as in the West. Yes Marxist terrorists hijacked a thriving modern industrialized state, but the Tsarist regime was as ridiculous on its face with serfdom as the communist one was with their countrywide gulag slave system. People went marching to their sentences at the direction of a monarch’s clerk or a Bolshevik’s commissar like the Jews at the direction of a Nazi official. What’s to say to this? Idea and Culture are intimately connected and some cultures are impeded compared to the top democracies, and many failed states call themselves democracies, but of course, this is pure piffle. Yes, you nationalists from failed or failing countries, like my very own angry Russian emigrant, it has got nothing to do with blood! It is brains alone that count; it’s how one organizes society, the proper protection of human rights, an independent judicial branch of government, the separation of powers, free elections and all those splendid creations of the democracies throughout history, despite its many intellectual enemies like Putin, the KGB and the Marxists, (of course, the Religionists are right up there at the top as bitter foes to liberty as well).
In the decade of Putin, the FSB has portrayed themselves in propaganda films like The Special Department as they wanted themselves to be seen, (see, The New Nobility), just as the CIA does in America. Behind the FSB’s rapid growth of power with the ascension of Putin, they have been just as ineffective at fighting terrorism as the CIA. And in regards to upholding an independent judiciary, curbing the mafia-state rising right underneath their feet or bringing real culprits to justice, they have utterly failed, as the KGB did before them. They are lap dogs, a whitewash to Putin’s tarnished throne. They have become another arm of the bandit state, but don’t say, “Poor pitiful Russia!” Nobody is free without effort. The Russian masses' romantic attraction to the state is deplorable and always has been. The people have quietly marched to their passing in absolutely frightening numbers, either with demise by alcoholism or death by authoritarianism. Shame on the Russian Orthodox Church, Russian Nationalists and the Russian Communists, all preaching against democracy like an Iranian Ayatollah. The Great Satan be damned! There is a person for this epithet and his name is Vladimir Putin, and never forget that germ of truth from that old Russian saw, “Half the population is behind bars and the other half are guarding them.”
For the more than 50 links to sources, see, http://eastamant.com/article.php?arti..., "This Ain't Russia".
June 4, 2017
This book provides a pretty good synopsis on how we went from Glasnost to Moscow's current relationship with the West. The book makes it pretty clear that when the Soviet system turned into a massive sinkhole, Russian society needed to put a new plan in place to move forward. These lurches and clanks toward "the end of history" birthed the much-discussed oligarchs, as Roxburgh explains. "In 1992 the government issued privatization vouchers to every citizen. The idea was that these could be exchanged for shares in enterprises being privatised. In practice millions of people just sold them or gave them away and they ended up largely in the hands of a few shrewd entepreneurs or state enterprise managers who thereby became Russia's new capitalist owners." This is the origin of the Berezovskys and Khodorkovskys who amassed the power and the money in the Yeltsin years. The most money to be made, though, was in natural resources, and this is a big part of the reason that Russia is currently lashed tightly to the world petrochemical market--its economy has never grown past its dependence on raw materials coming out of the ground and Mr. Putin has (as he has the media) gained control of it as a strategic national resource. In telling this story, Roxburgh cites interesting commentary from people like Colin Powell and Mikhail Saakashvili to show the 'inside baseball' perspectives on the big geopolitical events that brought us here. He cites Condoleeza Rice, for example, in asserting that Putin had personally warned her and U.S. Ambassador Bill Burns in October of 2006 that "if Georgian provocations caused a security problem, Russia would respond." None of the post-Cold War U.S. administrations escapes criticism in this history for missed opportunities in its relations with Russia, and Roxburgh makes it pretty clear that Mr. Putin has effectively seized control of any entity in his society--not just the media, but the courts, the oligarchs, and any political opposition--that can embarrass him. Lying under the surface is the implied idea that Russian society was profoundly affected by the Yeltsin years and the perceived abuse it suffered at the hands of the West when the aforementioned gaping hole opened up between the Soviet system and the future. It seems that--in the same way Ronald Reagan arrived to alleve the perceived malaise of the Carter years, Putin emerged in 2000 to restore confidence and pride to a body politic that felt abused by nearly a decade of Boris Yeltsin and his entourage. To summarize, this book is a most welcome analysis of the interlocking pieces in contemporary Russian society and good analysis of what the Kremlin was saying to the rest of the world in moments like 9/11, the Color Revolutions in Russia's Near Abroad, and the 2008 Georgia invasion. I found this book most enjoyable and useful.
October 20, 2021
Following discussion with a dear friend regarding current affairs that led to a publication regarding one of our perceived adversaries in the PRC, I turned a couple weeks ago to reading about another - this time in the form of Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Although published in 2013 pre-Crimean Annexation, I can tell you that Angus Roxburgh’s The Strongman - Vladimir Putin and the Struggle for Russia still packs a punch delivered in the form of riveting information from Russian political backchannels, much of which ends up foreshadowing what did occur in March of 2014.
Within his book, Roxburgh, a former foreign correspondent in Moscow turned PR advisor to the Kremlin for several years, strives to great lengths to illustrate the inner workings of Russia’s so-called “sovereign democracy”, a Vladislav Surkov coined term describing the nation’s will to decide what kind of democracy it might need. Through this lens, Roxburgh demonstrates the countless attempts that Russia made to move closer to the West in foreign policy while still dominating its population domestically, something that western nations would never come to accept whereas the Kremlin would never comprehend as being politically incompatible with the widely accepted concept of democracy.
This all being said, Roxburgh also underlines the many slights from the West as well, including commitments not to expand NATO within the ex-Soviet Union sphere of influence that were trampled, as well as failure to comprehend the lengths to which the Kremlin was prepared to resolve its perceived issues in Chechnya. Ultimately, the author highlights the failure of adjustment in foreign policy once the Cold War ended from the “victors”. Continuing to see Russia as a menace right out of the gate bundled with the continued embracing of nations immediately surrounding the ex-Soviet Union are what doomed the relationship between nations, which arguably reached points of no-return during both the Rose and Orange Revolutions.
Overall, The Strongman was an interesting read, and I would recommend it for anyone looking into the foundations of the current state of affairs surrounding Russia and its foreign policy. As it stands, the main message Roxburgh alludes to is the fact that Cold War thinking and friction have basically remained, despite the now gone communist mentality. This miscommunication can be attributed to both sides of the coin as nations fail to agree on basic principles, consequently leading to a winding up of rather than attempting to understand one another’s fears. As we barrel into a post-Afghanistan age with a simmering European Union, it will be interesting to see what Russia’s place in the world will be moving forward.
Within his book, Roxburgh, a former foreign correspondent in Moscow turned PR advisor to the Kremlin for several years, strives to great lengths to illustrate the inner workings of Russia’s so-called “sovereign democracy”, a Vladislav Surkov coined term describing the nation’s will to decide what kind of democracy it might need. Through this lens, Roxburgh demonstrates the countless attempts that Russia made to move closer to the West in foreign policy while still dominating its population domestically, something that western nations would never come to accept whereas the Kremlin would never comprehend as being politically incompatible with the widely accepted concept of democracy.
This all being said, Roxburgh also underlines the many slights from the West as well, including commitments not to expand NATO within the ex-Soviet Union sphere of influence that were trampled, as well as failure to comprehend the lengths to which the Kremlin was prepared to resolve its perceived issues in Chechnya. Ultimately, the author highlights the failure of adjustment in foreign policy once the Cold War ended from the “victors”. Continuing to see Russia as a menace right out of the gate bundled with the continued embracing of nations immediately surrounding the ex-Soviet Union are what doomed the relationship between nations, which arguably reached points of no-return during both the Rose and Orange Revolutions.
Overall, The Strongman was an interesting read, and I would recommend it for anyone looking into the foundations of the current state of affairs surrounding Russia and its foreign policy. As it stands, the main message Roxburgh alludes to is the fact that Cold War thinking and friction have basically remained, despite the now gone communist mentality. This miscommunication can be attributed to both sides of the coin as nations fail to agree on basic principles, consequently leading to a winding up of rather than attempting to understand one another’s fears. As we barrel into a post-Afghanistan age with a simmering European Union, it will be interesting to see what Russia’s place in the world will be moving forward.
April 10, 2023
Consider this, I am 73 years old, and all I have ever heard about Russia in my life has been western propaganda. For my entire life, Russia has been presented as the enemy. If you are younger than me, then this is true for you too.
I have been following events in Ukraine since the coup in 2014, which didn't really make the news in the west.
When I hear people talking about the war and their opinions on Russia, I ask: do you know about the 2014 coup? Very few people are aware of this event. There was also a time when Vladimir Putin was portrayed as a good guy in the west. But that would not last as you would expect.
This book was recommended to me by a friend, and I was ready to dismiss it as just more propaganda. When I read of the qualifications of the author of this book, I decided to read it, and I'm glad I did. This book contains the subtleties and nuances of Vladimir Putin and his rise to power. If you baulk at that statement, then there is nothing in this book for you.
Recently, I heard a comment about Russia in relation to the Ukraine war that said, "Russia thinks the world is out to get it". To be able to come out with a statement like that means you have to ignore that in the 19th century, the world sent its best army to attack Russia. In the 20th century, the world sent its best army to attack Russia. In both cases, Russia was triumphant, but you'd have to forgive the Russians for thinking that the world is out to get them because for the last 200 or more years that has actually been the case.
I had a young man explain to me that America got involved in the Ukraine conflict, because "it is the right thing to do" I had to point him to the Wikipedia page that details the nearly 70 countries in which the Americans have played an active part in changing the regime Even when that regime had been democratically elected. Given the sheer weight of America, both politically and popularly by way of its overt influence in all forms of media.
I'd recommend anyone read this book, who wants a deeper understanding of Vladimir Putin, and contemporary Russia, than what the western media portrays.
I have been following events in Ukraine since the coup in 2014, which didn't really make the news in the west.
When I hear people talking about the war and their opinions on Russia, I ask: do you know about the 2014 coup? Very few people are aware of this event. There was also a time when Vladimir Putin was portrayed as a good guy in the west. But that would not last as you would expect.
This book was recommended to me by a friend, and I was ready to dismiss it as just more propaganda. When I read of the qualifications of the author of this book, I decided to read it, and I'm glad I did. This book contains the subtleties and nuances of Vladimir Putin and his rise to power. If you baulk at that statement, then there is nothing in this book for you.
Recently, I heard a comment about Russia in relation to the Ukraine war that said, "Russia thinks the world is out to get it". To be able to come out with a statement like that means you have to ignore that in the 19th century, the world sent its best army to attack Russia. In the 20th century, the world sent its best army to attack Russia. In both cases, Russia was triumphant, but you'd have to forgive the Russians for thinking that the world is out to get them because for the last 200 or more years that has actually been the case.
I had a young man explain to me that America got involved in the Ukraine conflict, because "it is the right thing to do" I had to point him to the Wikipedia page that details the nearly 70 countries in which the Americans have played an active part in changing the regime Even when that regime had been democratically elected. Given the sheer weight of America, both politically and popularly by way of its overt influence in all forms of media.
I'd recommend anyone read this book, who wants a deeper understanding of Vladimir Putin, and contemporary Russia, than what the western media portrays.
March 14, 2022
I enjoyed how approachable this book made the last 20+ years of Russia's history of engaging with the West. It attempts to explain how Putin rose, and generally explains his worldview and how it led him to take the actions that Russia has taken domestically and internationally. This book also serves as a primer for all sorts of crises over the same period. I agree with many of Roxburgh's conclusions, although he dabbles in a frustrating case of whataboutism that equates Russia's actions to the West's occasional failures to live up to our liberal ideals, especially when he doesn't bring Russia's domestic repression in to this comparison (the Iraq/Georgia comparison is more apt, I'll admit). I do agree that Putin has generally failed in his initial aims internationally (to reintegrate as a respected power) and that there is blame to be had on both sides, although Putin's anti-democratic and corrupt tendencies are his own failings and Russia's acceptance of them its own burden to change (although clearly the world has to deal with him lashing out). Roxburgh's analysis of Russian electoral interference is also clear-eyed - yes, Russia played around and Trump was happy for the help, but America (and Britain, regarding Brexit) needs to do more soul-searching on how these cretins arose internally rather than dumping the blame on Putin.
January 26, 2025
Aided by a panoply of interviews of important public figures from Russia, the US, Georgia and across Europe, Angus Roxburgh provides a comprehensive overview of Russian foreign policy and its developments under Vladimir Putin. The interviews, conducted by the BBC between 2010 and 2011 while Roxburgh was chief consultant for a BBC documentary series on Russia, allow the author to present a detailed narrative framed by personal accounts of the Putin administration. The result is a clear account of the differing perspectives on international issues amongst diplomats from different countries delivered in a compelling way that could almost be described as ‘character-driven’.
The biggest achievement of this work is how Roxburgh effortlessly and clearly articulates the Russian perspective on international relations without ever justifying it. In doing so, he challenges the paternalistic approach that western media and often governments take towards Russia.
The Strongman is an essential read for anyone seeking to understand why the Russian government acts the way it does, and how Putin’s rule has been shaped by his interactions with Western leaders.
9/10
The biggest achievement of this work is how Roxburgh effortlessly and clearly articulates the Russian perspective on international relations without ever justifying it. In doing so, he challenges the paternalistic approach that western media and often governments take towards Russia.
The Strongman is an essential read for anyone seeking to understand why the Russian government acts the way it does, and how Putin’s rule has been shaped by his interactions with Western leaders.
9/10
November 5, 2018
Good book to understand Putin’s Russia. But it’s too little analysis, mostly about what has happened. I would hope the author could interpret historical events more. The change of Putin in the past 20 years has not been explained. Why he changed from a reformist, someone who was very interested in economic development, someone who was ambitious in reviving Russia’s national pride, changed into someone whose nationalism became hinderance to economic development? Russian people have not lived better, especially if compared to other developing countries in the past 20 years, despite oil prices went up. What’s wrong with Russia policies? Author talked about corruption as a major factor, but didn’t go into more details and analyze why.
May 9, 2017
One of the best non fiction books that I have ever read. Truly fair and balanced, capturing all the nuance and complexity, makes you see things from Putin's side without excusing his atrocities, and provides a really valuable understanding especially considering the fact that Russia has increased its role in global affairs since the book was published, and the book helps you with your view on current political atmosphere.
June 19, 2017
Despite a somewhat stereotypical (from a foreigner standpoint) first page, the novel analyzes objectively 20 years of Russia contemporary history. The author is educated about Russia, making the novel one of the few accounts of the most important events in recent the history of the country that are not (even unconsciously) biased towards western colonialism or patronizing.
July 9, 2022
Whilst this book does provide some interesting background on the rise of Putin and the Yeltin era, it really does little else besides show how much the author wants Putin removed from office and be replaced by a globalist who would bring democracy Inc. to Russia.
The author has no firsthand accounts of Putin nor had he even spoken to him, it’s just another Russophobic book.
The author has no firsthand accounts of Putin nor had he even spoken to him, it’s just another Russophobic book.
October 16, 2017
I thoroughly enjoyed the way Roxburgh narrates the experiences he encountered in tandem with knowledge and reasonable opinions. A great read to better appreciate, grasp and envisage politics in the Russian Federation for the future.
March 14, 2019
Excellent read. LOVED how Putin was described during his many bitch fits. Kept me engaged the whole time, yet was detailed and factual. Not bland, definitely was spicy at times, in a good way. Solid read, would recommend.
July 25, 2019
An amazing review of his climb to power..
February 26, 2020
The first really good book that I've read on Putin. Never a dull moment.
September 3, 2025
Highly commend for anyone wanting to understand better the broader context of the Ukraine/Russia crisis.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews