From their exclusive VIP lounges, world leaders observed as the renowned former figure skating icon Irina Rodnina lit the Olympic flame to commence the 2014 Sochi Winter Games.
The grand opening torch ceremony, steeped in the themes of “peace and tolerance,” served as Vladimir Putin’s strategic foray into soft power diplomacy to make a global impression.
A decade later, Rodnina was once again bestowed with the honor of inaugurating a winter sports event. This time, she initiated the race with the starting gun as a multitude of Russian skiers, barred from participating in Western competitions, assembled at the starting line of an annual cross-country race on the outskirts of Moscow.
This stark juxtaposition encapsulated a decade marked by Putin’s annexation of Crimea and the subsequent eruption of the most significant conflict witnessed since World War II.
Simultaneously, Putin has fomented nationalist sentiments domestically, evoking nostalgia for Russia’s imperial and Soviet legacy.
By positioning himself as the ultimate guardian of Russian sovereignty and traditional principles, Putin has starkly positioned himself against the West, often denouncing it as “satanic.”
The recent news of an opposition figure’s imprisonment on Friday dealt a severe blow to the already stifled dissent within the country. Putin’s grip on domestic politics now appears unassailable. The demise of Navalny underscored Putin’s dual-front campaign – externally against Ukrainian nationals and internally against dissenting voices.
Approaching the second anniversary of the invasion, Russians witness a rapid transformation of various aspects of their daily lives under the stewardship of their president.
Youngsters are indoctrinated to defend Russia’s honor, while imbibing a glorified version of its history. War veterans, often former members of the infamous paramilitary Wagner group, play a prominent role in society.
Once vibrant theaters and museums, hubs of independent cultural expression, now face censorship and suppression, with artists and directors facing incarceration or exile. Some museums now exhibit personal effects of fallen soldiers.
Under the influence of a militaristic orthodox church, Russia has virtually criminalized LGBTQ+ expressions, penalizing citizens for displaying rainbow symbols or supporting gay rights.
In a visible display of Russia’s embrace of conservative values, authorities cracked down on a risqué performance in Moscow, signaling a tightening of political freedoms even for the well-connected. Prominent pop singer Philipp Kirkorov has aligned himself with the regime, entertaining troops in occupied Ukraine.
Observers note a climate of fear and surveillance, reminiscent of Stalinist purges, where individuals report on each other, fostering an environment of suspicion and denunciation.
A recent survey revealed that up to 30% of Russians refrain from expressing their views on the war, even among friends and family.
“We have seen a clear nationalistic and patriotic consolidation around the war,” remarked Denis Volkov from the independent Levada Centre, citing widespread support for the invasion among Russians.
Putin has rallied the political and business elites, ensuring their loyalty through a mix of coercion and incentives. The departure of Western companies has paved the way for a new breed of Russian entrepreneurs, benefiting from the redistribution of wealth and resources.
Despite occasional setbacks, Putin’s grip on power remains unchallenged as the country heads towards a presidential election that is expected to extend his tenure. His victory is likely to be construed as an endorsement of the invasion, solidifying his authority.
However, dissent persists, with grassroots movements demanding the return of conscripted soldiers and questioning the prolonged military engagement in Ukraine. While pro-war voices dominate the public discourse, a growing segment of the population harbors reservations about the conflict.
As the Kremlin tightens its control over media and public discourse, the long-term repercussions of the war on Russian society remain uncertain. The pervasive propaganda and surveillance tactics employed by the regime raise concerns about the lasting impact on the collective psyche of the populace.
Despite the prevailing narrative, signs of dissent and disillusionment suggest that the Russian populace may not be as unified behind the war effort as portrayed. The true extent of the war’s repercussions and the resilience of Russian society against state propaganda are yet to fully unfold.