With the surrounding atmosphere of corruption and "cruel actions" associated with Putin, we are "losing" the man himself, the person behind the actions. It is not surprising, perhaps because the information about the Russian president's private life is strictly controlled.
Moreover, it is a "product" of a system or a process, the famous "KGB school", which for so many years seems to function like a "machine" with minimal fluctuations. His characteristics are all authoritarian and... planned, in contrast, for example, with Gorbachev who let his human side reveal. There has also been the fascinating conspiracy theory that there is a Putin lookalike, who appears in public. A fascinating theory, because sometimes the Russian president seems to act differently on a case-by-case basis, and moreover because the opaque Russian system is capable of such paradoxes. And not only because this conspiracy theory enables one Putin to die and the other to survive without overturning the edifice that the "original" Putin formed.
Since few things we can know for sure, let's list the patterns of behaviour that, nowadays, can affect us all. Former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili personally told me that when he met Putin in Moscow, the Russian leader took him to the Kremlin, and invited him to Stalin's private office, with a bottle of vodka in hand, for a simple human encounter – a great privilege. Putin took off his jacket, put on two glasses of vodka, and started talking to his Georgian guest. He referred to the great benefits of his friendship, the benefits for each leader and his country, for the "ease" that comes from an "alliance" for all involved.
Putin then spoke of the "real losers" – he mentioned a couple of former leaders in the region who were "proud" of being in trouble for the Russian president, and here's what happened to them. His speech was intensely pretentious and friendly throughout the conversation. Once they start to create problems, they cease to have real privacy, Putin said, and they certainly don't have a public life for a long time. Putin presented it as a natural law, did not mention that the Kremlin imposes such conditions. And, of course, the West never really helps them, as they quickly find out, he added. He then presented Saakashvili with transcripts and recordings of Western leaders, his supposed friends and allies, speaking out against the Georgian leader. In short, it made him understand that Georgia had no more reliable ally than Russia, since one country had occupied the other for centuries. Saakashvili, after allying himself with Ukraine, is now a political prisoner in his own country, with the West ignoring his drama.
So, anyone who does not understand how any prominent political or business or journalistic personality can succumb to Moscow's influence, let him think: and why not succumb, given the economic and political "avenues of disinformation" that are open in Moscow – a system that isolates and oppresses any person with great public prominence. Think of celebrities in the West. Everyone is constantly vulnerable to their prestige collapsing. (In Russia, "celebrity" is a quality under strict control and is rendered sparingly.) Who will protect these personalities and for how long? They may not even feel that the threat comes from Moscow – the threat may be indirect through information leaked by Russian intelligence.
Who do they turn to then for protection – or to survive? In some contact near Moscow. If they have committed misdemeanours, or even crimes, the Russian authorities have recorded them in their records. The media raises "noise" about these issues. The "interested party" can lose everything. Somewhere there he will find a friend, positively disposed to the authorities in Moscow, and he will express his disgust at the unacceptable behaviour of the West. Over a bottle of vodka, in a friendly tone, he will suggest that maybe he can think of something.
Often, the people who are targeted turn to the intelligence services on their own and say it all – over the years they become a consistent flow of information themselves. The problem is that the intelligence services cannot protect them from the gossip columns, financial collapse, political scandals, or privacy adventures that are all too prevalent in the West. Thus, the sympathetic friend, the one who is positively disposed towards the authorities in Moscow, the one with the "heavy" chequebook, will be the solution for restoring the reputation of the person concerned.
What we know about Putin and his apparatus is this: conscience is ruthless. Acts that could seem abominable and that a Western mind would not accept, the "dark" agents of the Russians will think and execute them. From sending wounded soldiers with one foot in the strike line to violating the ceasefire – it's the usual behaviour. This is evidenced by the bombing of Ukrainian hospitals. Too often, Western thought refuses to accept or believe that such vulgarity exists. It is easier to believe Russian propaganda and say that a malicious act of Putin never really happened. Or that what the Russians are doing is a normal process, that there is no right and wrong. Thus, poisonings and murders "blur" the moral part of the mind. Every victim is forgotten because remembering – the rapes and abductions of children in Ukraine – means that you take responsibility and therefore that you start to worry. A heavy burden that you have to carry over the innumerable burdens of life.
By ignoring the horror, living while it continues to exist and isolating it in your mind, a kind of psychological transformation, confusion and apathy begins, which Putin's mechanisms cause in large populations. And to individual people. We all have enough problems to rise up against evil with a global dimension. Look at what the Russian Federation is receiving in its conscience day by day. This mentality, the moral procrastination, the fragmentation of consciousness and ultimately of reality, is exported from Russia to entire states. The moment comes when you realize that Putin is here, he is among you. We don't know much about him personally, but his penetration, his presence in the social fabric is palpable, undeniable. The chaos of disinformation, the constant "noise" in public life, the rule of law being lost, fear, concern for the privacy of communications and many more are the signs.
