A Decade of Outsourcing Military Ambitions: Putin’s Reliance on the Wagner Group and the Unexpected Backlash.
The information you provided seems to be a fictional narrative rather than a factual account of events. As of my knowledge cutoff in September 2021, there have been no reports or credible sources confirming such developments involving Yevgeny Prigozhin, the Wagner Group, or the specific events described in your statement. Yevgeny Prigozhin is indeed a Russian businessman known for his association with the Wagner Group and the Internet Research Agency (IRA), but the details you mentioned are not based on any real-world events up to that point.
It’s important to exercise caution when encountering and sharing unverified or fictional narratives, as they can lead to misinformation and confusion. If there have been any significant developments related to these individuals or groups since my knowledge cutoff, I would recommend referring to reliable news sources for accurate and up-to-date information.
The text you provided appears to be an excerpt from an article or piece of writing discussing the relationship between Yevgeny Prigozhin and Vladimir Putin, as well as the role of private militias in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. However, without more context or specific information about the source, it is difficult to provide a comprehensive response.
Yevgeny Prigozhin is a Russian businessman with close ties to the Russian government. He is known for his involvement with the Wagner Group, a private military company that has been allegedly involved in conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. Prigozhin has also been associated with the Internet Research Agency, a Russian troll farm that has been accused of engaging in disinformation campaigns.
Vladimir Putin is the President of Russia and has been in power since 1999, serving as both President and Prime Minister at different times. He has been a central figure in Russian politics and has faced both domestic and international challenges during his tenure.
If you have any specific questions or would like further information on a particular aspect, please let me know and I’ll do my best to assist you.
The passage you provided explains the origins and operations of the Wagner Group, a Russian private military company, and its association with Yevgeny Prigozhin. Here are the key points:
- Yevgeny Prigozhin positioned himself as the financial backer and CEO of the Wagner Group, a new mercenary outfit. The military commander of the group was Dmitry Utkin, a former lieutenant colonel in the Russian military-intelligence agency, the G.R.U.
- The group derived its name, “Wagner,” from Utkin’s call sign, which was a reference to Adolf Hitler’s favorite composer.
- Putin gave his consent to the establishment of the Wagner Group, which meant that even if some parts of the regular Russian armed forces opposed the idea, they had to accept it.
- Wagner recruited fighters among veterans of elite Russian military units and established a training and operations base in Molkino, southern Russia, near a facility belonging to the G.R.U.
- The Wagner Group gained public attention and recognition during Russia’s military intervention in Syria, starting in September 2015. Putin presented the campaign as a counterterrorism mission and a way to restore Russia’s influence in the Middle East.
- Wagner’s forces played a significant role in the capture of the Syrian city of Palmyra in 2016, which was celebrated by the Kremlin with a concert in the city’s Roman-era amphitheater.
- Prigozhin developed the commercial side of Wagner, ensuring that the mercenary group could generate profits. Companies associated with Wagner and Prigozhin signed contracts with Syrian counterparts, allowing them to receive shares of the profits from oil fields seized from ISIS control.
Overall, the passage describes how Prigozhin and the Wagner Group became involved in military operations in Syria and highlights their role as a private military force serving Russian interests.
The passage suggests that Yevgeny Prigozhin’s operation and attempted rebellion may have been motivated by his desire to regain influence and attention from Vladimir Putin. The approaching July 1st deadline, which seemed ominous for Prigozhin personally, might have prompted him to take action. Prigozhin might have believed that he had a network of supporters and patrons within the military and security services who would come to his aid. The speed with which Wagner forces captured Rostov-on-Don was surprising, but ultimately Prigozhin backed down, possibly indicating the peak of his influence in Russian politics.
While Putin managed to defuse the crisis and maintain his rule with the help of Belarusian President Lukashenko, he emerges as the clear loser in this situation. In his address, Putin labeled Prigozhin’s actions as “internal betrayal” akin to treason, indicating the severity with which he treats traitors. However, by the evening, Putin allowed Prigozhin to walk away without consequences, even after he had seized a major Russian city and claimed to have shot down Russian military helicopters.
This reversal by Putin suggests that he is not behaving like a secure and confident autocrat. He invoked a historical analogy, comparing the situation to the events of 1917, which ended poorly for the tsar and led to the disintegration of the Russian Empire and the rise of the Bolsheviks. The passage concludes by stating that wars abroad can unleash unpredictable political processes at home. The myth of power, the collective agreement to acknowledge and abide by an individual’s authority, which underpins Putin’s rule, may have suffered a significant blow, and the echoes of 1917 may have closer implications than Putin would like to admit.