Every week we wrap up the must-reads from our coverage of the war in Ukraine, from news and features to analysis, visual guides and opinion.
Russia destabilised by armed rebellion
A 24-hour rebellion launched by Wagner leader Yevgeny Prigozhin against Moscow’s military leadership left the world with more questions than answers as analysts and political leaders sought to figure out what it means for Vladimir Putin’s leadership and the war in Ukraine.
The mutiny started when Prigozhin accused the Russian military of launching an attack on a Wagner base on Friday, killing his soldiers, as Pjotr Sauer reported. He then announced that his forces were marching from Ukraine into Russia and, with apparent ease, took control of military sites in Rostov, from where the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been coordinated.
His forces continued their march to Moscow on Saturday, coming within 200km of the capital. The Kremlin was left stunned by the advance, which constituted the biggest challenge to Putin’s authority since he became president in 2000, as Luke Harding wrote in his account of a 24 hours that shook the country.
The next unexpected twist came when Belarus announced that its president had negotiated a deal with Prigozhin which would see him exiled to Belarus and Wagner troops who had participated in the mutiny pardoned. Prigozhin and his forces then left Rostov – to a rapturous reception that resembled the departure of a rock star.
Putin, who had accused Prigozhin of “treason” in a televised address to the nation on Saturday morning and vowed a “brutal” response to the uprising, was not heard from until late on Monday.
What does the mutiny mean for Putin?
While analysts were left scratching their heads on what the mutiny meant for Ukraine, Putin’s long-term leadership and the future of Wagner and Prigozhin, on one thing most were united: the Russian president had been humiliated.
The shock waves from the rebellion will continue for months, Luke Harding wrote, fuelling political instability and raising question marks over Putin’s fitness to lead. Putin looks weaker than at any time since he became president in 2000. His decision to invade Ukraine looks like a major strategic blunder – and one that may, sooner or later, force him from power.
Putin has allowed a real challenge to the stability of his power in Russia to develop, Chatham House’s Keir Giles wrote, adding: “If he had a convincing plan for how to deal with [the rebellion], he didn’t share it.”
Shaun Walker agreed, writing: “Even for Putin’s usually nimble propagandists, painting the shocking events of the weekend as a win for the Kremlin is proving a hard sell.”
Wagner’s march to Moscow left the Russian leader looking like a “hapless bystander” and exposed the Russian system as “utterly inept”, Rajan Menon and Daniel R DePetris wrote in an opinion piece. Putin relied on a foreign leader to negotiate an end to the crisis, agreeing to drop criminal charges against Prigozhin, a man he had described hours earlier as a traitor. “Russians both inside and outside the elite doubtless noticed all this,” they wrote.
Analyst Anatol Lieven disagreed, arguing that Putin “handled things well”. The president “had nothing to gain by seeking violent revenge, which would have killed large numbers of Russians and badly undermined the Russian war in Ukraine. He had everything to gain by showing magnanimity,” he wrote.
What about the Ukrainian counteroffensive?
News of the mutiny sparked hope in Ukraine that the nightmare could soon be over. “Hope that there was going to be a change of power in Russia and a troop withdrawal from Ukraine,” as one Kyiv resident told Lorenzo Tondo. “Then, suddenly that was it! End of the movie. Nothing happened … I felt so disappointed.”
But Ukrainian officials believe the turmoil in Russia could give the country a chance to step up its counteroffensive, as Lorenzo and Artem Mazhulin reported, boosting the morale of its own troops while simultaneously demoralising Russian forces. “This is a sign of the collapse of the ruling regime, and such processes will intensify,” Ukraine’s military intelligence spokesperson, Andriy Yusov, said.
No major breakthroughs were reported as a result of the mutiny, but as Ukrainian deputy defence minister Hanna Maliar put it: “Every day, there is an advance. Yes, the advances are slow, but they are sure.”
The rebellion also confirmed the key points of a Chatham House study on how not to end the war, Keir Giles wrote. “Instead of proposals such as a ceasefire, territorial concessions or other outcomes that reward Russia, Ukraine has to be backed not just to survive but to inflict a clear and unambiguous defeat on Russia … [the rebellion] should put an end to suggestions that Russia cannot, and indeed should not, be defeated.”
But analysts also predicted that the mutiny could prompt a wounded Putin to lash out.
“While a successful rebellion would have served Ukraine, at least in the short term, it is now likely that a humiliated but rebooted Putin will renew attacks with more intensity,” academic and political commentator Samantha de Bendern wrote.
What next for Wagner?
The future of Wagner, whose troops have been some of Russia’s most effective combatants in Ukraine, remains unclear.
Those who took part in the mutiny were pardoned due to their previous service to the Russian state, according to the terms of the Belarus deal. But in a speech on Monday, Putin said the group would be shut down and the group’s fighters had the choice to sign a contract with the ministry of defence, step down or move to Belarus, as Andrew Roth and Pjotr Sauer reported.
However, one former Wagner commander told Pjotr in a separate story that it was “unlikely” many of the soldiers would join the regular Russian army. “Wagner troops will not fight for the army,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It is either Wagner or nothing.”
Representatives at five Wagner recruitment centres across Russia – including in Moscow, Samara and Novosibirsk – told the Guardian that the mercenary group’s offices were open for business as usual.
The Belarusian president, Alexander Lukashenko, said he had offered Wagner troops an “abandoned base” but Prigozhin has not commented on whether other Wagner fighters planned to follow him to Belarus, as Pjotr reported.
Meanwhile, the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, reassured allies the mutiny would not affect Wagner’s operations in Africa, as Jason Burke reported. The mercenary group has thousands of fighters in Central African Republic and Mali, both considered by the Kremlin as a springboard to greater influence on the continent and a source of lucrative natural resources.
What about Prigozhin?
“The fact that Prigozhin is still alive indicates that whatever he holds over Putin is so damaging, and [that he is] so well protected by unseen allies, that it is safer for Putin to allow him to live – for now,” wrote Samantha de Bendern.
The Wagner leader flew into exile in Belarus on Tuesday but many analysts found it hard to believe he would remain quiet, or that Putin would allow him to live happily in Minsk in the longer term.
“The Russian leader has a political motive to deal harshly with his maverick warlord or risk appearing weak, a cardinal sin in Kremlin politics,” Andrew Roth wrote. “And the Russian leader has never been known as one to forgive a betrayal. At some point Prigozhin will surely have to pick up the tab for his foray into revolutionary politics.”
In a defiant 11-minute statement on Monday, Prigozhin defended the Wagner uprising and denied he had sought to topple Putin, adding that his troops would resist being subsumed under the Russian defence ministry, would not sign contracts, and that Wagner could even be allowed to continue its operations in Belarus, as Pjotr Sauer reported.
Nevertheless, Russia appeared to be moving ahead with the dissolution of Prigozhin’s vast mercenary and business empire, as Pjotr reported separately, with Russian media reporting that Prigozhin’s notorious “troll farm” and media business was looking for fresh ownership.
Were there any other winners or losers?
In the aftermath of the rebellion, the whereabouts of Russian army general Sergei Surovikin became a hot topic. His well-known links with Prigozhin fuelled rumours that he may be purged or put under investigation for supporting the mutiny, Dan Sabbagh and Andrew Roth wrote, amid US media reports that he had prior knowledge of the uprising.
Meanwhile, in Belarus, the opposition’s hopes that the defenestration of Putin could lead to the toppling of longtime dictator Alexander Lukashenko were dashed, as Shaun Walker reported.
But though Lukashenko emerged as an “early beneficiary” of the aborted Wagner march on Moscow, those benefits “may not have a long shelf life”, Julian Borger wrote, arguing that Prigozhin’s presence in Belarus could be destabilising and that with Putin weakened, Lukashenko’s own staying power must also be questioned.
Shaun Walker agreed, arguing that Putin “will not have enjoyed having to publicly thank his neighbouring dictator for ‘help’ in solving an internal Russian crisis”, nor his subsequent boasting.
