As long as Putin tries to appease Russia's far right, war in Ukraine will continue

But president Vladimir Putin's unwavering commitment to his maximalist ambitions in Ukraine has polarised Russian society. A March 2025 Levada Centre poll revealed that 59pc of Russians support the initiation of peace negotiations, and that figure soared to 76pc amongst Russians under the age of 24.
Nonetheless, there is a vocal ultranationalist minority that is continuing to stoke the flames of war with Ukraine and perpetual conflict with Nato.
Since Ukraine announced support for a 30-day ceasefire in Jeddah on March 11, Russian ultranationalists have urged Putin to reject peaceful negotiations and escalate the war. Former Kremlin advisor Sergey Markov cautioned Putin against accepting a ceasefire unless it was paired with an arms embargo on Ukraine.
In an April 2025 interview with ultranationalist outlet Tsargrad, fascist philosopher Alexander Dugin declared: 'Let's be realistic: we need to bet on our own strength and prepare for a new round of confrontation.' Dugin's target was the European Union and he argued that Europe was already preparing for war with Russia.
Despite countervailing pressure from business-minded elites like Russia Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) chief Kirill Dmitriev and oligarch Vladimir Potanin, Putin's actions have aligned closely with the pro-war camp's agenda.
Putin's stalling tactics have convinced the US to stop negotiating with Russia for the time being and the Russian military has stretched the frontlines to capitalise on Ukraine's war material constraints.
The recent destruction of Russian strategic bombers via Ukraine's Operation Spiderweb has only strengthened Putin's intransigence.
Why is Putin aligning with Russia's ultranationalist minority, even though doing so leads to tighter sanctions and only marginal offensive gains? Like many of the mysteries surrounding contemporary Russia, the answer can be found in Putin's understanding of Russian history.
While Western experts have paid extensive attention to the threat of popular unrest and liberal dissidents like the now-deceased Alexei Navalny to authoritarian stability in Russia, history shows that the biggest threat to Putin's regime comes from the ultranationalist right.
Tsar Nicholas II's suppression of the total war rhetoric of conservative philosopher Ivan Ilyin, and ultranationalist firebrand Vladimir Zhirinovsky's rise from the ashes of the 1993 constitutional crisis, are cautionary tales for Putin.
The abortive June 2023 Wagner Group mutiny reaffirmed to Putin the significance of the threat from militant ultranationalists. Through acts of repression like Wagner Group chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's assassination and MH-17 perpetrator Igor Girkin's imprisonment, Putin has mitigated the immediate danger posed by ultranationalists to his regime's stability.
He has co-opted the Russian Orthodox Church, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and hawkish regional governors to ensure that an ultranationalist bloc does not consolidate.
The militarisation of Russian society means that this is only a temporary fix, and ultranationalists could try to topple Putin if the war ends on unfavourable terms for Russia.
As ultranationalists saw Russia's cessation of the 2008 Georgian War that left Mikheil Saakashvili in power and the 2015 Minsk II Accords with Ukraine as gestures of appeasement of the West, the onus is on Putin to pursue total victory.
If Putin pursues general mobilisation, he risks widespread unrest
The challenge for Putin is that he has few available escalation cards. The recommendations that Russia's most hawkish voices have pushed since the Ukraine invasion began in February 2022 are suicidal.
If he pursues general mobilisation, he risks widespread socioeconomic unrest and the destruction of the current stealth conscription system that provides Russia with the manpower it needs. If he gambles with tactical nuclear weapons use, Russia will likely destroy its partnership with China and image in the Global South.
This means that Putin needs to appease ultranationalists by doing more of the same: indefinitely stalling a ceasefire and intensifying Russia's war against Ukrainian civilians. As it would take Russia 152 years to occupy all of Ukraine at its current monthly rate of advance, this will not completely satisfy Russian ultranationalists.
While Putin wields dictatorial power in modern Russia, his grip is weaker than it appears. This is why he needs to appease ultranationalists at the expense of peace in Europe and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Russians.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

RTÉ News​

an hour ago

• RTÉ News​

Putin's counter-narratives and stalled talks

If you were to only listen to Russian President Vladimir Putin's account of the war in Ukraine (as many millions of Russians do), you might conclude that Russia somehow stumbled into the conflict unwittingly, almost as if it were forced to invade its neighbour. Russia's leader told reporters at this week's St Petersburg International Economic Forum that he had told former US President Joe Biden during one of their last phone conversations (clearly, just before Moscow began its full-scale invasion in February 2022), that "conflicts, especially hot conflicts, must be avoided, and that all issues should be resolved through peaceful means." It was a brazen-faced claim from the man who started the largest conventional war in Europe since World War II. Mr Putin, just like current US President Donald Trump, is running a narrative that the Biden administration was at fault for not trying to stop a war that, in truth, Russia was hell-bent on starting anyway. Since returning to the White House in January, Mr Trump has repeatedly said that the conflict is "Biden's war". Mr Trump has also repeatedly claimed that the war would not have started if he had been president. On this hypothetical point, Mr Putin, is now in agreement too. "Indeed, had Trump been the president, perhaps this conflict would not have happened. I fully acknowledge that possibility," said the Russian leader during the same press event on Thursday in St Petersburg. What Mr Putin really means is: the Biden administration opposed Russia's demands to subjugate Ukraine, whereas Mr Trump, had he been the US president in the months leading up to February 2022, would have been more likely to pressure Ukraine to give in to Russia's demands. For his part, Mr Trump blames another former US President, Barack Obama, also a Democrat, for not dealing with Russia a decade ago. At the G7 meeting in the Canadian Rockies earlier this week, he said the war in Ukraine would not have happened if Russia had still been a member of the club, or G8 as it was known. (Russia was kicked out of the G8 in 2014 after its illegal annexation of Crimea). Despite Mr Trump's claims about how he could have averted the war from starting had he been president, he has failed in his promise to end it quickly since returning to the White House in January. It was always an unrealistic pledge. To its credit, the US, aided by Turkey, managed to get both Ukraine and Russia to hold two sets of brief, but direct talks in Istanbul in May, albeit at a low diplomatic level. Getting Ukraine to the table was never an issue. As early as the second week of March, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had said his country was ready to sign up to a US proposal to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire. The barrier to any ceasefire deal has been Russia, which has repeatedly rejected the US and European-backed ceasefire proposal. Those two sets of direct talks between Russian and Ukrainian delegations last month in Istanbul have delivered large-scale prisoner exchanges, humanitarian gestures that do just about enough to keep the US engaged in the process. But otherwise, the talks are at a standstill. Russia is talking about a third set of direct talks, but the Ukrainian side say they have heard nothing from Moscow. Yesterday, at the same conference in St Petersburg, Mr Putin said, as he has done previously, that he considers Russians and Ukrainians to be "one people". "In that sense the whole of Ukraine is ours," he said. That statement shows that Russia's position has not changed since it launched the war. It still disregards Ukraine's sovereignty, although Mr Putin also says that Russia is not seeking Ukraine's capitulation. According to Ukraine's first deputy foreign minister Serhii Kyslytsia, during the second meeting in Instanbul, the head of the Russian delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, described the war as "Russians killing Russians". Mr Medinsky, an ultranationalist historian, has previously questioned the existence of the Ukrainian and Mr Putin's decision to appoint him as the head of the Russian delegation is a clear signal that Moscow has no intention to negotiate. "The talks in Istanbul have demonstrated that Russia has no interest in pursuing peace and is pursuing its maximalist demands," Peter Dickinson, a Kyiv-based editor of the Atlantic Council's Ukraine Alert, told RTÉ News. Instead of pursuing peace, Russia, emboldened by a lack of pressure from the US to end the war, is intensifying its drone and missile assaults on Ukrainian cities. Last Tuesday morning's deadly Russian drone and missile assault on Kyiv – a nine-hour assault and the largest so far this year – killed 30 people and injured more than 170. Twenty-three of the victims, a death toll that included children, were residents of a 9-storey block of flats in the city's western suburb of Solomianskyi. It was struck by a Russian missile. "I think people in Kyiv are very alarmed about the rising number of attacks," said Mr Dickinson. "There's a feeling that people are sitting ducks". This week, Mr Putin also said that he was willing to meet with Mr Zelensky during a final phase of negotiations. However, he quickly followed that statement by questioning the legitimacy of Mr Zelensky's presidency – a long-running Kremlin propaganda narrative that Mr Trump briefly bought into back in March, wrongly labelling the Ukrainian president as "a dictator without elections". Russia argues that Ukraine must hold new presidential elections given that Mr Zelensky's term as president officially ended in May 2024. It was the stuff of more counter-narrative fantasy. Mr Zelensky is a democratically elected leader whereas Russia's elections are rigged like a piece of scripted theatre. While Mr Putin continues his counter-narratives and Russia continues its attacks, Ukraine is still pursuing its strategy of calling for a ceasefire first before there is any talk over territorial issues. Mr Zelensky had arrived in the Canadian Rockies for the G7 meeting on Tuesday - the same day that Russia launched its massive drone and missile on Kyiv - hoping to get some face time with Mr Trump. But his long journey had been in vain. Mr Trump had left early to deal with the escalating situation in the Middle East, according to the White House. And so Mr Zelensky ended up meeting his European partners (plus Canada's new PM Mark Carney), just as he could have done in Europe. Mr Trump's departure may have been a coincidence but, either way, it demonstrated just how low down Ukraine features on the US president's list of priorities. "As of now, no productive talks are possible," said Oleksandr Kraiev, a Ukrainian foreign policy expert at the Ukrainian Prism thinktank in Kyiv. The West, he argues, needs to considering targeting Russia's trading partners in Asia, particularly China, with "proper second-grade sanctions" in order to pressure Moscow to stop the war. "The idea from the Ukrainian side is to find a new format that could change the pressure on Russia," said Mr Kraeiv. That new diplomatic format would need Europe to play more of a role in pressuring Russia to seriously negotiate given the Trump administration's reluctance to introduce new sanctions on Moscow. But more than a month after the leaders of France, Germany, Poland and the UK travelled to Kyiv and gave Russia a 48-hour ultimatum to agree to a ceasefire (or face new sanctions and increased military aid to Kyiv), the steam seems to have run out of European efforts to up the pressure on Russia. Mr Putin had torpedoed that ultimatum by offering direct talks in Istanbul, which Mr Trump approved. 'The Coalition of the Willing', a British and French-led initiative to shore up support for a European peace monitoring force in a post-war scenario, has gone quiet too, perhaps waiting for the outcome of this week's NATO annual summit in The Hague. Crucially, it also lacked US support. "The question now is how do you get Russia to be interested in peace," said Mr Dickinson, who believes it's "futile" to expect the US to make the breakthrough. "Now it's up to Europe to step up and take action but there is still no political will".

Irish Independent

7 hours ago

• Irish Independent

Why Russia's imperial past shapes its present and haunts its neighbours

Unfinished Empire by DCU professor Donnacha Ó Beacháin gets to the heart of how the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was not so much an end to empire as a temporary retreat Today at 21:30 These days, empires rarely admit they are empires. They speak of civilisation, of security, of shared history – all while projecting power and extracting obedience. Most European empires disintegrated in the second half of the 20th century, and European nations quickly discarded much, if not quite all, of the imperialist mindset. For the lands of eastern Europe and central Asia that had once submitted to Russian rule, however, the process only began in the 1990s with the collapse of the Soviet Union – and the past has never quite passed. It lingers in language and pipelines, monuments and missiles. Donnacha Ó Beacháin's Unfinished Empire explores how Russia's imperial past continues to shape its present and haunt its neighbours.

Irish Independent

7 hours ago

• Irish Independent

Fury in Kyiv as Vladimir Putin tells economic forum ‘the whole of Ukraine is ours'

Russian leader says he wants President Zelensky to accept the 'reality on the ground' Russian president Vladimir Putin said yesterday that in his view the whole of Ukraine was 'ours' and cautioned that advancing Russian forces could take the Ukrainian city of Sumy as part of a bid to carve out a buffer zone along the border. Ukraine's foreign minister denounced the statements as evidence of Russian 'disdain' for US peace efforts and said Moscow was bent on seizing more territory and killing more Ukrainians. Register for free to read this story Register and create a profile to get access to our free stories. You'll also unlock more free stories each week.