This is an intriguing if often vexing book on Russia since the fall of communism. Though the inside cover calls it the, “first comprehensive history of post-communist Russia” it’s an awkward history. Triesman is a political scientist, not a historian, and the book is organized as such. The first four chapters are on Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Putin, and Medvedev. The next chapters are on aspects of Russian life and politics. The upshot is that many subjects end up getting covered repeatedly. First you hear about Chechnya with Yeltsin, and then later in its own chapter.
It would probably be unfair to call Triesman an apologist for Putin, but he definitely thinks the criticism of Putin goes too far. Sometimes he makes salient points, as when he compares Russian politics to many Latin American nations, arguing that it’s more similar than people realize. (He might take this argument too far, though). He also makes a decent case on the Russian interpretation of the Georgia crisis. How would America act, he noted, if US peacekeepers were killed in a nation experiencing internal turbulence due to the government there cracking down on its ethnic minority (who happened to be the same ethnicity as your nation?) and violating the rights of those minorities? Odds are we probably wouldn’t be too damn happy about it. However, Triesman really overdoes it. He notes that Putin has a $60,000 watch, but then says a half-sentence later that there is no clear reason to think he has more than a few hundred thousand dollars. (Really? Doesn’t the watch indicate we might be underestimating his true wealth? More damningly, Triesman really glosses over the strange deaths of his most serious critics. That gets barely a passing mention. He notes the theory that Putin’s government helped cause the bombings in ’99, but he doesn’t really try to delve into it. So yeah….the first sentence of his paragraph might be a bit too nice on Triesman. Still, I don’t really think he’s an apologist; more than he’s just reacting against a narrative that he feels is too strongly being laid down – and for the most part Triesman makes an interesting argument. He also does offer plenty of criticisms of Putin, ranging from overall governmental ineffectiveness to acknowledging (if downplaying) the more serious issues listed above. I will note, however, that reading this right after Russia’s seizing of Crimea sure gives a different slant on things.