What Happens if Russia Collapses? And Why It Could Be Very Bad

ANALYSIS – Previously, I wrote about why we should be preparing for a collapse of Russia, especially if the Ukraine war ends in defeat for Vladimir Putin. Russia has always been held together by raw power and repression internally and military expansion externally.

And now, with a war in Ukraine (against all of NATO by proxy) that it will find extremely difficult to win, a collapse of Russia should be considered increasingly possible, if not actually likely.

This is something our strategic planners should be focusing much more attention on.

And I would argue, perhaps we should all be looking at ways to avoid a total Russian collapse or the nation being deathly weakened.

Why?

Because as bad as Vladimir Putin is, no one wants multiple (some possibly nuclear-armed) former Russian mini-states in conflict with each other.

And the spillover effects this would have.

Then there would be one or more Russian mafia states on steroids threatening just about everyone.

We also certainly don't want China to take over resource-rich Siberia from a ‘rump' Russia, which would also make China a real Arctic state, not a fake ‘near Arctic' state as it calls itself now.

Alternatively, Russia could survive mostly intact but in a highly weakened state. This would allow China to simply make Russia essentially a subordinate vassal state.

Things are already moving in this direction but would be dramatically accelerated if Russia was suddenly weakened further.

None of these options are good for the U.S. or the West.

And these risks make good arguments for the U.S. and NATO to not push for a total defeat of Russia.

I say this as someone who has been a Russia hawk for decades and has supported Ukraine fully in its defense against Russia's unjustified invasion.

I have also argued that Western unity and support for Ukraine has the added benefit that it serves as a model for defending Taiwan and as a warning to Communist China of what it will face if it attempts to take the independent island nation by force.

Still, it may be time to look at the much broader ramifications of how this war in Ukraine may end. And which endings may ultimately be best for the United States and the West.

But first, we should understand how a Russian defeat in Ukraine could trigger its collapse, how that collapse might unfold and what could be the possible aftermath.

Alexander J. Motyl, a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark, writes about some worst-case scenarios in Foreign Policy:

…if the spark does come, would a likely Russian collapse be destabilizing and violent, perhaps including civil war? Historian Marlene Laruelle, the director of the Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian studies at George Washington University, thinks so. “A collapse would generate several civil wars,” she said, as “new statelets would fight with one another over borders and economic assets.” Meanwhile, Moscow elites “would react with violence to any secessionism.”

Similarly, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has argued that “the dissolution of Russia or destroying its ability for strategic policy could turn its territory encompassing 11 time zones into a contested vacuum.” Russian groups might turn on each other and use violence, while outside powers could use force to expand their claims. “All these dangers would be compounded by the presence of thousands of nuclear weapons,” Kissinger wrote. The best course of action, he advised, would be to avoid rendering Russia “impotent by the war,” instead including Russia in a “peace process” whose details and enforceability remain nebulous.

While Motyl writes that there isn't much we can do about any of this except “observe the unfolding drama of Russia's likely collapse.” He adds:

That doesn't mean the West should just sit back as Russia degrades. It's imperative to prepare for a possible disintegration. Laruelle's and Kissinger's unlikely worst-case scenarios should inform policymakers as they hope for the best, expect the worst, keep cool heads, and prepare for contingencies.

I agree with his latter points as a generally good rule. Sadly, Motyl's prescriptions are thoroughly unimaginative, if not naïve.

He simply argues for more of the same with Ukraine and simply “hoping for the best.”

He says: “continued strong Western support for Ukraine—and eventually for a free Belarus and key countries like Kazakhstan—is the best guarantee that the aftershocks will be minimized if Putin's empire comes to an end.”

However, this fully ignores the powerful role the U.S. and NATO play in shaping the war and its outcome.

Of course, we can do more than watch. We are the ones arming Ukraine and thus enabling the potential trigger to Russia's collapse.

He also ignores the monumentally energizing impact a Russian collapse would have on China and its dangerous impact on the West.

And he says nothing about how to avoid or mitigate this catastrophic potential result of strengthening China.

That is far more concerning to me. And that is something that our forward-thinking policymakers should be fully engaged in right now.

It's also something I will be looking at and writing more about soon. ALD

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

READ NEXT: Fed Up With LAWLESSNESS, Residents of This Leftist City Step Up >>