Putin's adviser: The ZSRS solution was illegal

A fewer days ago, Russian President's advisor Anton Kobiakov announced that the ZSRS's solution was illegal due to the fact that it was not approved by the legislature of People's Deputies – the formal founding body of the Union. He besides stated that the Belovezhian Agreements which were at the heart of the resolution of the ZSRS were signed by persons who had no legal power to do so.

Russia uses this communicative to describe the war in Ukraine as an ‘internal conflict’ to which 3rd countries should not interfere. This explanation has far-reaching consequences – it can service as a foundation for claims against another erstwhile republics of the USSR, including Armenia, Kazakhstan and even NATO associate States.

In fresh years, the Russian Federation has systematically undermined the sovereignty of the erstwhile russian republics. These actions aim not only to keep geopolitical influences in the region, but besides to reconstruct the imperial structure, resembling the erstwhile russian Union. This process includes military aggression, political, propaganda, legal and hybrid operations, including cyber attacks and misinformation.

The neo-imperial policies of the Kremlin are based on 2 pillars: geopolitical and ideological. Geopolitically, Russia views post-Soviet space as its sphere of influence – the alleged “close foreign”. The strategical location of these countries, their natural material possible and infrastructure are of their importance. In turn ideologically, the Kremlin uses the concept of “Russian world” (Russian Mir), promoted by state media and Orthodox church. The Russian authorities besides usage the doctrine of Eurasian Alexander Dugin, which assumes the cultural and political distinctness of Russia from the West and the right to dominance in Eurasia.

The fall of the USSR in 1991 led to the creation of respective independent states whose independency Russia formally recognized. However, since the early 2000s. Russian abroad policy has become dominated by revisionist tendencies. In a 2005 speech Vladimir Putin called the dissolution of the russian Union "the top geopolitical disaster of the 20th century". This conviction became the determinant of Kremlin policy for the next decades.

The first step towards the implementation of neo-imperial policy was the annexation of Crimea in 2014, carried out in violation of global law. Russia held an illegal referendum there and took control of the peninsula, recognizing it as part of its territory. At the same time, she supported separatists in Donbasa, resulting in a long-term armed conflict.

The full-scale invasion in February 2022 was an escalation of this strategy. The rhetoric of the Kremlin turned the war in Ukraine into a communicative about the "brotherly conflict" and "denasification" and "demilitarisation" of Ukraine, which was to justify aggression against the sovereign state.

Step by step: questioning the independency of another republics

Russia is not limited to Ukraine. In 2008, she attacked Georgia, occupying Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Moscow recognised these territories as independent states, which was a manifest violation of Georgia's territorial integrity. In Moldova, he supports the separatist Transnistria, holding Russian armed forces there despite Chishinev's opposition.

The Baltic States Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are regularly attacked in Russian propaganda. In 2022, the Russian Duma even considered a resolution to nullify Lithuania's independence. Although it was yet not accepted, the fact that it was brought in was a serious political signal.

In Central Asia, Russia utilized riots and social unrest to strengthen influence. An example is the ODB intervention in Kazakhstan in January 2022, which aimed to strangle protests, but de facto served to show Moscow's dominance. In Armenia, Russia balances support and neutrality against the conflict with Azerbaijan, thereby losing credibility as a safety guarantor.

Table of regional destabilisation

For years, Kremlin has been utilizing the communicative of "protection of fellow countrymen abroad" to interfere in the interior affairs of neighbouring countries. In countries specified as Latvia and Estonia, where there are many Russian minorities, Russia uses this argument to undermine their interior policies – from education to citizenship.

Granting Russian citizenship to residents of occupied areas – as in Donbasa or Crimea – is simply a form of ‘passportisation’, which is to justify later military and political actions.

Russia is conducting an aggressive disinformation run against the erstwhile russian republics, sowing chaos, distrust of democratic institutions and breaking up social unity. In addition to conventional media, it besides uses bots, trolls and troll farms on social platforms. In 2024 and 2025, further cyber attacks by the GRU were revealed, aimed at critical infrastructure of Ukraine, Moldova, the Baltic States and Poland. These attacks were aimed at collecting data on military movements and Western aid logistics.

The West is late, but consistently, responding to Russia's actions. Strengthening the east flank of NATO, expanding military presence in Poland and the Baltic States, military and financial support for Ukraine – these are elements of response. The EU has developed assistance programmes for Moldova and Georgia, but another countries, specified as Armenia and Kazakhstan, stay more exposed and exposed to Russian pressure.

However, it should be noted that the global consequence is frequently late and limited by deficiency of consensus on the scale of the threat. Russia makes effective usage of divisions among Western countries and the public's fatigue of the subject of Ukraine.

Conclusion: Revisionism as a State Doctrine

Russia seeks to revise the geopolitical order established after 1991. The aim is not only to reconstruct influences, but to de facto reverse the decolonization process that followed the collapse of the ZSRS. By undermining the legality of the independency of the erstwhile republics, Russia is paving the way for future interventions. This strategy, if not stopped, could jeopardise the safety of all Central and east Europe.

The global community must clearly argue this policy, recognising it as a threat not only to individual countries but to the stableness of the full strategy based on global law. A long-term deterrence strategy and the improvement of resilience to hybrid operations are needed.