2016 — the triumph of Vladimir Putin?

According to many experts, this year the Russian President is incredibly lucky. Whether their own efforts or by luck — he got everything he wanted and more.

But is that a correct impression may be, there is something that Vladimir Putin could not? How big are achieved in 2016, the success, and do not they bear within them the seeds of future difficulties? Talk about it from British experts on Russia.

James Nicks, head of study programs of Russia and Eurasia, Royal Institute of international Affairs (Chatham house):

2016 has been extremely successful for Vladimir Putin. In the narrow confines of what he considers Russia’s interests (but it is more accurate to call the interests of the Kremlin), the year has surpassed all expectations.

The United Kingdom is a constitutional crisis of enormous proportions.

Pro-Putin (or perceived) political forces have made gains across Europe, and — primarily — in the United States.

Putin the West has imposed its agenda in Syria and did not go to any concessions to Ukraine.

It is impossible to name any one area where he would have been defeated. Even the Russian economy is finishing the year growth — albeit small, less than 1%.

This does not mean that Russia has no serious long-term challenges and its future path will be strewn with roses. Problems in relations with Europe and America still to be resolved. Economy remains in stagnation. But there is no specific period has been successful.

I think Donald trump mentality — person transactions, rather than the principles. He is looking for better relations with Moscow. How far he will be willing for this to go unknown, but I believe, further than George Bush and Barack Obama. Therefore, for Moscow it would probably be more comfortable.

“Brakcet” makes the voice of the Kremlin in Europe, more loud, because marginalisiert Britain historically always have strong line against Russia.

I do not think that Putin was considered a British referendum as a matter of Prime importance and so much worried about the outcome, but if he could vote, of course, would vote for “brakcet”.

The Russian presence in Syria is sometimes compared with the war in Afghanistan 1980-ies. In my opinion, the Syrian situation is better for Moscow Afghan — for two reasons.

First, in Syria there is a massive participation of Russian land forces, and consequently, a large number of victims.

Secondly, Afghanistan has been the subject of ideological pride. Putin did not have before Bashar al-Assad such comprehensive commitments, like the Soviet Union before the Communist regime in Kabul. Putin may be a lot more flexible — depending on circumstances increase pressure on opponents of Damascus or weaken the Russian part without much damage to its prestige.

In Ukraine, he is psychologically more difficult to make concessions because he sees Ukraine as part of the historical Russian Empire.

However, it should not go to extremes and exaggerate the successes of Vladimir Putin. He is not omnipotent. His desire to face severe restrictions, imposed primarily by the economy.

It is expected that the Reserve Fund will be depleted in 2017.

As someone said of the greats, you can’t feed people the glory instead of bread.

Sam Greene, Director of the Russia Institute at London University’s kings College:

To me this point of view [about the extremely successful year for Putin] seems rather strange. On all counts.

First, the economy of Russia if I am not mistaken, finishing the year with a GDP growth of 0.7%. It is not a good indicator.

A number of high-profile resignations and “speaker” — is not a good life.

If you look at foreign policy, where we see conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, who do not see any end or edge. Also there are no visible signs of restoration of positive relations with Europe and the United States. China replacement too.

The successes of Putin referred to the election trump and “brakcet”. But it’s the cat in the bag. It is unclear what benefits will Russia get from staying trump in the White house and Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union (if it ever takes place).

The list of people duped by trump, rather long. In place of Putin I would be thinking about what are the promises and statements of the man who four times has been bankrupt.

As for the “breccia,” he into the hands of Putin only in the sense that create uncertainty in the ranks of the contingent of the West, makes him care more about their internal problems and pay less attention to what makes the Kremlin. But it’s the negative agenda that may not lead to positive outcomes for Russia.

In Syria, Russia declared itself, and quite successfully. It has proved its ability to project power over medium and long distances and simultaneously engage in two conflicts — in Ukraine and the middle East.

But she got into a fight that nobody wanted to get involved. Not seen that in English is called “exit strategy”.

Russia can affect the current situation, but there is no reason to think that her intervention in the middle East in the long run will end better than the last similar intervention by the US and Britain.

Yes, something Moscow could do, but what it will eventually lead — again, unknown.

If you care not about the real problems of Russia, and about what they say in the West, it really is possible to conclude that Putin gets what he wants.

Most European and American commentators today overestimate its power. And in Syria, it all depends on Putin and the Baltic States it will take 48 hours, is wanted, and the President of the United States appoints his will. Here, of course, is an exaggeration.

Russia became visible — especially in the military field, as was visible for a very long time. And the pendulum of perception has deviated too far. If earlier Russia exaggerated not taken into account, now exaggerated take.

People tend to blame abroad, insidious Kremlin, the masons or a global Caliphate — instead look at the root of their own problems. This blueprint has some Russian officials, including close to the Kremlin, it is observed in the West.