GZERO Media logo

Putin is still winning

Russian President Vladimir Putin arrives for a meeting with members of the Security Council via a video link at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow, Russia September 4, 2020.

At first glance, it's been a tumultuous few weeks for Russia's president Vladimir Putin.

There have been large anti-Kremlin protests in Russia's Far East. Putin critic Alexei Navalny has survived an assassination attempt that many now blame squarely on Russia's president. Turmoil in neighboring Belarus reminds many of the troubles Russia faced six years ago in Ukraine.

Look more closely, and Putin is sitting prettier than you'd think.


Start with Navalny. Putin is widely accused of ordering, or agreeing to, the murder of Alexei Navalny. And, yes, Navalny is now awake and surrounded by smiling family in a German hospital. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced on September 2 that Navalny was poisoned with Novichok, a nerve agent and chemical weapon available only to state intelligence services. It's not a weapon designed to deceive. And the purpose of the attack was probably less to kill Navalny than to intimidate all of Putin's critics by demonstrating what his government is willing to do. In that sense, it's mission accomplished.

Now look at the results of last week's Russian local elections. United Russia, the ruling party that Russians identify with Putin, lost its legislative majority in a couple of provinces, including Tomsk, where Navalny was poisoned. Western headlines note that pro-Navalny candidates won some seats on city councils.

But United Russia claimed victory in all 18 gubernatorial elections in which it competed, and its candidates won with higher vote margins than in elections last year. Did the coronavirus allow election-tampering far from the prying eyes of international observers? It's possible. That won't change the result.

Speaking of the virus, add the positive news for Russia's vaccine. On August 11, Putin announced that Russia had become the first country to approve a COVID-19 vaccine, which was given the name "Sputnik V" to remind the world that the Soviet Union was first to put a man in orbit. Eyes rolled in many countries as experts, suspecting a Soviet-style propaganda campaign, pointed to doubts about the vaccine's testing process.

But then the peer-reviewed international medical journal The Lancet reported on September 4 that in early phase trials of Sputnik V, it had indeed "induced a strong immune response" in the 76 people who participated with no adverse effects. There are still plenty of questions about the vaccine, but the headlines that most will see are that more countries are now lining up to pay for a jab. This week, India became the latest to open its wallet. From Mexico to Kazakhstan and Saudi Arabia to Vietnam, Belarus, and Brazil, more countries are showing an interest in Sputnik V.

Finally, there's the ongoing turmoil in Belarus. Protests there threaten the two-decade rule of Alexander Lukashenko, a man who has long irritated Moscow but who has integrated his country into an economic union with Russia that Putin hopes to deepen.

For the moment, however, Russian economic (and potentially military) support has been enough to keep Lukashenko in power. Belarus is much smaller and easier to manage than Ukraine, and it's now clearer than ever that Lukashenko owes his political survival directly to Putin.

Not a bad thing for a Russian president who relishes control.

A decade ago, Bank of America established the Global Ambassadors Program with Vital Voices, and the results are phenomenal. We've provided 8,000 hours of training and mentoring, engaging 400 women from 85 countries and helping women around the world build their businesses.

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, US President George W. Bush demanded that Afghanistan's Taliban government surrender Osama bin Laden and end support for al-Qaeda. The Taliban refused.

On October 7, US bombs began falling on Taliban forces. NATO allies quickly pledged support for the US, and US boots hit the ground in Afghanistan two weeks later.

Thus began a war, now the longest in US history, that has killed more than 3,500 coalition soldiers and 110,000 Afghans. It has cost the American taxpayer nearly $3 trillion. US allies have also made human and material sacrifices.

More Show less

US and Russia buy time to talk arms control: Americans and Russians are close to agreeing on a one-year extension of their last remaining nuclear arms control agreement. For months the two sides have been unable to settle on terms to extend the New START treaty, an agreement limiting long-range nuclear weapons that was hammered out by the Kremlin and the Obama administration back in 2011, and expires next February. One of the main points of contention was the Trump administration's insistence that Russia bring China into any new arms control pact. But Beijing has no interest in capping its nuclear arsenal at levels far lower than what the US and Russia have, while the Kremlin says that if China is part of it, then other Western nuclear powers like the UK and France should join as well. But those disputes will be shelved now, as Moscow and Washington have agreed to freeze their nuclear arsenals for one year and to keep talking about an extension in the meantime. Of course, the Kremlin — which proposed the one-year extension as a stopgap — can't be sure just whom they'll be talking to on the US side after January…

More Show less

It almost didn't happen — but here we are again. US President Donald Trump and his Democratic challenger Joe Biden face off tonight in the final presidential debate of the 2020 campaign.

More Show less

Download PDF


Three years ago, long before anyone had ever heard of COVID-19, a different kind of virus spread around the world: a piece of malicious software code launched by a nation state. It paralyzed computer networks in hundreds of countries, disrupted global shipping, forced pharmaceutical factories to shut down, and inflicted an estimated $10 billion of economic damage.

On the physical battlefield, a widely accepted set of rules, backed by international law, governs conduct, with the aim of protecting soldiers and civilians. Establishing common rules or guardrails is much harder in cyberspace, where borders can't be easily defined and the tools and tactics of combat are always changing. But it has never been more urgent.

More Show less
UNGA banner

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal