Soon after Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine in February a rash of stories appeared in the western media speculating that the Russian president was dying, or at least very seriously ill. The evidence offered was circumstantial but superficially compelling. This ranged from the absurdly long tables the dictator uses to keep his distance from his aides, to analysis of such symptoms as his awkwardly shaking limbs and puffy face. There were also reports that Putin keeps a top cancer specialist in his entourage at all times.
Now, no less an authority than the boss of the CIA, William Burns, has poured a douche of cold water on such wishful thinking. Addressing a security conference at Aspen, Colorado, Burns, a former US ambassador to Russia, said that there was no real evidence that Putin was sick. On the contrary, Burns believes that the Russian leader – who turns 70 this year – is in rude good health and bent on his goal of restoring Russia to great power status. It’s an aim that will include subduing Ukraine and turning it into a puppet state of Moscow.
In closed and centralised top down societies such as the old Soviet Union – which Russia has again become under Putin’s personal rule – the health of its dictatorial leaders has always been more important than in liberal democracies, where ailing leaders can always resign or be rapidly replaced by the verdict of the voters.
The collapse of the Soviet Union was hastened by a trio of geriatric leaders – Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko – who followed each other in quick succession. All three died in office; all were already mortally ill when in power. Only when a relatively young and healthy boss in the shape of Mikhail Gorbachev took control did things start to change.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Don't miss out
Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.
UNLOCK ACCESSAlready a subscriber? Log in