Professor Vlad Mykhnenko of the University of Oxford believes the Russian dictator will not attend tomorrow’s talks in Istanbul unless he is “drugged up”. Speaking to Front Line, he described a hastily convened 2 am press conference in Moscow as evidence of panic within the Kremlin. He joked that officials might invent maladies ranging from a car crash to an urgent case of diarrhoea to explain Putin’s absence and suggested a GP note could even be presented to Donald Trump as proof of illness.
Mykhnenko noted that unscripted encounters are not the Russian dictator’s strength. When unprepared, he stumbles over long words, mumbles and loses his train of thought—traits the professor says are signs of ageing. He said Russia’s media organs would be “running around like headless chickens” trying to manage the fallout. The expert argued that scrapping the meeting would not surprise him, given Putin’s track record of cancelling at the last minute.
Despite Russia’s public assurances that it has secured its western border, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy insists his forces remain active in Kursk and Belgorod. Mykhnenko predicts that even if Putin does not attend, Turkey’s initiative may lay groundwork for future talks, though he expects no breakthrough. He warned that without removing the Russian dictator from power, the cycle of conflict will continue.
Intense speculation surrounds whether Russian dictator Vladimir Putin will attend potential negotiation talks in Istanbul, with experts suggesting his appearance is highly unlikely due to a combination of perceived personal frailty and the Kremlin’s increasing desperation. Professor Vlad Mykhnenko, a political economist at the University of Oxford, indicated that the Russian dictator seems “rattled” and that any presence in Istanbul would be surprising, possibly requiring him to be “drugged up” to manage public scrutiny. Professor Mykhnenko noted that when not in such a state, the Russian dictator often mumbles, mispronounces words, and loses his train of thought, signs of potential decline.
The prospect of direct talks between President Zelenskyy and the Russian dictator carries historical weight. Their last significant meeting in Paris in 2019, under the auspices of President Macron, was described as disastrous. A younger, newly elected President Zelenskyy, who had hoped to charm a deal for peace, was reportedly met with a capitulation demand from Putin, which Zelenskyy rightly refused. This past failure likely makes the Russian dictator wary of unscripted encounters, as he is known for heavily orchestrated press conferences rather than genuine debate. Professor Mykhnenko highlighted that Putin’s non scripted appearances reveal a man less sharp than he was decades ago.
Recent actions, such as a two AM press conference, suggest a state of panic within Moscow. Professor Mykhnenko painted a picture of “headless chickens” in the Kremlin, scrambling for a strategy. His baseline scenario is that the Russian dictator will not attend any Istanbul meeting, perhaps citing a sudden illness, a convenient accident, or even manufacturing drama like a flight diversion. Such a no show would likely draw criticism from some international figures, though the impact of this is debatable, particularly concerning figures like Donald Trump, whose reactions are often unpredictable and self serving. European responses might involve discussions of stronger sanctions, though internal disagreements, particularly from countries like Hungary and Slovakia, could delay meaningful action for months.
The economic situation within Russia is increasingly dire. Despite outward projections of strength, the country is reportedly running a budget deficit four times faster than planned, having already expended its annual budget in the first quarter. The Russian sovereign wealth fund is said to be depleted of cash, forcing considerations of drastic measures such as tapping into citizens’ savings or declaring an economic emergency. While an estimated 20 to 22 percent of the Russian population, particularly those in the military industrial complex and their families, as well as elites benefiting from monopoly profits due to sanctions, may have seen an increase in wealth, the broader population faces severe cuts to social spending, pensions, and healthcare. Reports of crumbling infrastructure, including bursting water and sewage pipes and collapsing dams, paint a grim picture of domestic neglect as all resources are funnelled to the war effort. Inflationary pressures are mounting, with basic necessities like potatoes and butter becoming exorbitantly expensive, leading to an increase in petty crime.
Russia’s war machine is sustained by various means, including an expensive volunteer scheme offering upfront bonuses reportedly in the range of 30,000 to 50,000 Russian Roubles (approximately £279 to £465 GBP), plus substantial compensation for injury or death. The Russian dictator recently claimed 65,000 new recruits per month, a figure that raises questions about their deployment and effectiveness, given the scale of losses. The Russian military is also increasingly reliant on pariah states like North Korea for ammunition, a dependency that speaks volumes about the degradation of its own industrial base. China, Iran, and India also play roles, often benefiting from cheap Russian oil and gas. For instance, Britain is now reportedly receiving Indian oil that is effectively a mix of Russian and Gulf oil, rerouted and rebranded.
In stark contrast, Ukraine’s economy, while under immense strain, shows signs of resilience and projected growth of 3.3 percent for the year. This is partly attributed to strategic international support and domestic mobilisation. Western financial aid, crucial for maintaining social stability, is directed towards pensions, salaries, and the non war budget, with strict oversight, including an American general inspector in Kyiv, ensuring funds are not misused. Ukrainian domestic funds are then channelled to the war effort. Professor Mykhnenko emphasised that despite allegations, there is no evidence of Western weaponry like Javelins or HIMARS being sold off, nor of American money being stolen. Money allocated by Western governments for weapons for Ukraine is typically spent within the donor countries’ own defence industries, thereby investing back into their economies. The estimated cost to rebuild Ukraine currently stands at a staggering $526 billion US Dollars (approximately £394.5 billion GBP), underscoring that investment in Ukraine’s defence now is significantly cheaper than future reconstruction costs. Initiatives like the Danish government’s programme, which directs aid to Ukraine’s own burgeoning defence industry, are fostering economic activity and homegrown weapons production, including drones and other vital equipment.
President Zelenskyy’s administration continues to grapple with rooting out corruption, an issue with deep historical roots. He came to power on an anti corruption platform and enacted laws targeting oligarchs, preventing wealthy individuals who own more than a specified amount (e.g. one million US Dollars, approximately £750,000 GBP) from owning media outlets. While mundane corruption persists, key Ukrainian business figures have reportedly contributed significantly to the war effort. The focus remains on strengthening Ukraine’s institutions and aligning with Western standards, a far cry from the kleptocratic system underpinning the Russian regime.
The global geopolitical landscape is also shifting, with concerns about a new global arms race. The perceived withdrawal of the United States from the global stage is prompting nations like South Korea, Poland, and Saudi Arabia to seek alternative security arrangements, including potential nuclear capabilities. Saudi Arabia’s recent $142 billion US Dollar (approximately £106.5 billion GBP) arms deal with the US, part of a larger $600 billion US Dollar (approximately £450 billion GBP) investment package, and its interest in nuclear power technology, are indicative of this trend. This rearmament drive occurs even as the world faces pressing climate change challenges, a grim reminder of the priorities skewed by aggressive states like Russia. The Trump administration’s dealings, including the reported gift of a $400 million US Dollar (approximately £300 million GBP) jet from Qatar to Donald Trump, also highlight the complex interplay of international relations and personal enrichment that often clouds sound policy.
