Surkov Caught Between What He Thinks He is and What Putin and Others Do, Pastukhov Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, February 26 – Vladislav Surkov’s first public statement after leaving his post as the Kremlin’s coordinator for Ukraine shows that he is caught between what he appears to believe he is and what Vladimir Putin and others who have long viewed him as Putin’s mouthpiece believe him to be, Vladimir Pastukhov says. 

            The former Kremlin aide, the London-based scholar says, “on this occasion balanced on a very fine line separating a provocation against society,” something he has engaged in in this past, “from a betrayal of the interests of the system” which he has long been a defender and he betrayal of which is much more dangerous (mbk-news.appspot.com/sences/vladislav-surkov-kak-nachinayushhij-dissident/).

            “Surkov said much that he could not have permitted himself to say while in his former post,” Pastukhov continues. “But at the same time, he said this with such pathos that the impression was created that he hadn’t left the post.” In many ways, he reminded his listeners of the man who kept saying goodbye but still didn’t leave.

            That status, “both may or may not correspond to reality. It is quite possible that Surkov like all of us is in the position not of ‘those in the know’ but of those who have to predict on the basis of coffee grounds.” That complicates those who want to know whether he speaks for Putin or not – including Putin himself.

            And that matters, Pastukhov says, because “even if Putin in fact thinks as Surkov does,” the Kremlin leader may not want those views to be put out in public except by himself and at a time of his own choosing. By acting as he has, Surkov may be seriously overrating his own influence and confusing his view of himself with the view of Putin and others.

            Surkov may be angry that he was pushed out because the Kremlin’s approach to Ukraine has changed, but he doesn’t appear willing to acknowledge how this happened and why. “Unfortunately for Surkov,” the Russian scholar says, “life is simpler and harsher” than he may imagine.

            “His retirement was directly connected with the failure of the last ‘Normandy format’ meeting,” which did not mark the collapse of Ukraine and the collapse of Western support for Kyiv as Surkov earlier had suggested it would. Now, Surkov appears to have taken his revenge by taking a position on Ukraine different than Putin’s public one is.

            Even as Putin was continuing to stress that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people,” Surkov allowed himself to present the Ukrainians as something less than a people. Putin may think that too, Pastukhov says; but he clearly isn’t going to be pleased by this “petty hooliganism” on Surkov’s part.

            Surkov permitted himself an even greater act of hooliganism by suggesting that the entire game of constitutional amendments is about giving Putin a sixth term. That too may be true but it certainly isn’t something the Kremlin leader wants to say or have someone around him say until the game is up.

            The former Kremlin advisor’s assumption that he is free to make such statements suggests that he has overrated his power and position. It could be that he will return to a position of power, but it is also possible that he is now permanently an outsider, “a beginning dissident” who has permanently burned his bridges,