Roundtable report: the future of Russia

Published:
Author: scga_editor_02
An article from SCGA editorial team. 

By Setareh Bozorgy, Research/Practice Placement Intern at the John Smith Trust and MPhil Peacebuilding and Mediation at the University of St Andrews

“… the fellows called on UK and Scottish policymakers to develop a coherent, long-term policy toward Russia that is independent of the war in Ukraine. They stressed the importance of aligning sanctions with reform-oriented demands—such as releasing political prisoners and repealing repressive laws—ensuring these measures are not purely punitive but facilitate systemic change.

The Scottish Council on Global Affairs (SCGA) convened a roundtable discussion focused on the future of Russia on 2 December 2024. The event brought together the ten fellows from the John Smith Trust 2024/25 cohort of the Leaders in Exile: Future of Russia Fellowship Programme with invited guests from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), the Scotland Office, and the Scottish Government, alongside academics from the University of Glasgow.

The roundtable provided a unique platform for dialogue, bridging the scenarios generated in a workshop with practical insights into governance, decentralisation, leadership transitions, and the role of external actors in shaping Russia’s trajectory.

During the discussion, the fellows called on UK and Scottish policymakers to develop a coherent, long-term policy toward Russia that is independent of the war in Ukraine. They stressed the importance of aligning sanctions with reform-oriented demands—such as releasing political prisoners and repealing repressive laws—ensuring these measures are not purely punitive but facilitate systemic change. The fellows also advocated for supporting decentralisation and the empowerment of Russia’s regions to reduce regional inequalities and foster governance less reliant on authoritarian control.

From Scenarios to Strategic Insights

The Futures Workshop held earlier that day facilitated by Futures coach Elise Ford, set the tone for the SCGA discussion by encouraging fellows to envision alternative scenarios for Russia in 2045. The scenarios the fellows created explored themes such as the risks of systemic stagnation, pathways to decentralisation and federalisation, societal resilience, and the transformative possibilities of energy transitions. Although the exercise encouraged the fellows to think beyond probable or plausible outcomes and to consider preferable futures as well, in the end the fellows acknowledged that no single scenario fully encapsulated their ideal vision for Russia, reflecting the complexities of imagining transformative futures under current constraints of authoritarianism.

The roundtable discussion built on these thematic explorations, focusing on the following key areas: leadership transitions; decentralisation; external influences; building shared values; and peaceful relations with Ukraine. Fellows and Scottish contributors alike focused on how these factors could shape Russia’s trajectory in a post-Putin future and identified opportunities for systemic change.

Leadership Transitions and Systemic Change

In looking to a post-Putin Russia, the conversation between the fellows and Scottish contributors began with focus on potential pathways for leadership transitions and opportunities for reform despite the enduring constraints of authoritarianism. The discussion touched on how internal dynamics and external influences could shape governance after Putin, highlighting both the possibilities for systemic change and the risks involved.

One Scottish participant drew a comparison to Uzbekistan’s transition following the death of Islam Karimov, highlighting how entrenched elites, while aiming to preserve stability, can sometimes create conditions for significant reforms. They pointed out that although the succession initially upheld the status quo, Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s leadership introduced liberalisation, economic reforms, and a reduction in repression. This example offered a counterpoint to the often-deterministic views of a post-Putin Russia as being inevitably stagnant or corrupt.

Despite their initial feelings of pessimism regarding Russia’s future during the earlier workshop, the fellows echoed this optimism, pointing out that any successor to Putin would likely attempt to distance themselves from his legacy to secure legitimacy, both domestically and internationally. One fellow highlighted the potential appeal of a narrative that shifts all blame onto Putin, stating: “It was all his [Putin’s] fault; I’m the new leader, and everything will change now.” This framing, they argued, could give a new leader the political space necessary to implement reforms while reducing public resistance to change.

However, the fellows also cautioned that such a transition would necessitate clear and immediate actions—such as ending the war in Ukraine and repealing repressive laws—to demonstrate genuine reform and rebuild public trust.

Decentralisation and Federalisation

The concentration of power in Moscow was highlighted as a crucial obstacle to reform during the discussion, fellows and Scottish participants agreed that empowering Russia’s regions could address systemic inequalities and create a balanced governance. The fellows highlighted that decentralisation could lay the foundations for democracy by enabling local governance and therefore reducing dependency on Moscow’s centralised structure. This perspective was grounded in a shared recognition of the exploitative relationship between the capital and the regions in Russia, which one fellow described as resembling a form of ‘internal colonisation.’

In this, the fellows stressed the importance of institutional and legal reforms as being critical for decentralisation in Russia, with emphasis on tax redistribution to provide financial stability for regions without natural resources. One fellow highlighted the potential for regional autonomy to incentivise economic self-reliance, arguing that such autonomy would discourage separatist tendencies while promoting sustainable development across the country. However, they also acknowledged that such reforms would require a reimagining of Russia’s federal structure to allow regions greater control over their economic and political futures.

The Scottish contributors whilst supportive of decentralisation stressed the complexities of implementing this in a country as vast and diverse as Russia. One contributor noted this tension between Russia’s rigid state doctrine, which views decentralisation as a threat to its national unity, and the necessity of addressing growing regional disparities. Such a tension, he argued, would risk exacerbating governance challenges if unaddressed.

Regardless of this, both fellows and Scottish contributors acknowledged that decentralisation does not equate to fragmentation. Instead, they shared a vision of decentralisation as a potential path forward for unity, rooted in shared governance and equitable resource distribution. This part of the discussion concluded with a recognition that Russia’s regions must be empowered as a crucial step toward building an inclusive and democratic society, although achieving this goal would require both external and significant internal reforms.

External Influences on Russia’s Future

The discussion on external influences underscored the role of Western nation’s in shaping Russia’s post-Putin trajectory. Both fellows and Scottish participants acknowledged the West’s considerable influence on Russia’s future trajectory. However, tensions emerged over its current focus on Ukraine. Fellows agreed that Western governments have appropriately prioritised supporting Ukraine, but they expressed concern that this focus has sidelined long-term strategies for engaging with Russia. One fellow argued that Western policy often swings between containment and appeasement, with little emphasis on proactively shaping Russia’s internal developments. “The West needs a clear and consistent policy for Russia—a strategy that is independent of Ukraine” the fellow argued, emphasising the necessity of envisioning Russia beyond its current authoritarian regime.

Fellows further emphasised the importance of aligning sanctions with clear reform-oriented demands, such as the release of political prisoners and the repeal of repressive laws, such as those targeting “foreign agents” and “undesirable organisations.”, laws which currently make it impossible for alternative political candidates or leaders, whether inside or outside of the country, to participate in the political sphere. However, there was a point to be made about balancing such sanctions, with fellows cautioning against overly punitive measures, which risk alienating ordinary Russian’s and thus serve to reinforce the regime’s anti-Western rhetoric. A balanced approach would leverage external pressure from Western governments whilst supporting grassroots democratic movements, and civil society in Russia.

Energy policy was also a critical point of discussion. One Scottish contributor highlighted the potential for the UK’s clean energy initiatives, such as Great British Energy, to contribute to shaping Russia’s trajectory by reducing European reliance on authoritarian energy powers like Russia. Fellows and experts considered whether a stable or fragmented Russia better serves Western interests in the context of energy and geopolitics. One fellow stressed the perception of Russia as “too big to fail,” emphasising its integral role in global energy markets and broader geopolitical dynamics. Both fellows and experts agreed that Western energy strategies could play a pivotal role in mitigating Russia’s geopolitical leverage while fostering a more stable and predictable post-Putin regime.

Building Shared Values for a Post-Putin Russia

Fellows and Scottish contributors alike acknowledged that while the opposition to Putin unites diverse groups, this unity risks unraveling in the absence of a clear, forward-looking vision for governance. The challenge, they agreed, lies in transitioning from oppositional politics to a constructive framework that can sustain the country’s democratic transformation. One contributor pointed to the risks of a “political vacuum” emerging after Putin, drawing parallels with Kenya’s experience transitioning from dictatorship, where opposition groups initially united against a common enemy but quickly fractured once the dictator was removed.

“Where are the set of values and principles that can unite people beyond just opposing the current regime?” one contributor posed, emphasising the importance of defining a cohesive shared vision for the future of Russia to avoid the risks of post-transition instability, and further falling into authoritarianism. There was also emphasis that progress on human rights, including LGBTQ+ rights and protections for vulnerable groups, must not be deferred under the pretext of addressing “more pressing” political or economic issues.

The discussion highlighted both the opportunities and challenges inherent in the post-transition process. Fellows expressed optimism that shared values could serve as a unifying force. There was further emphasis on the critical role of civil society in Russia and grassroots movements in fostering dialogue and consensus during this fragile period.

Envisioning Peaceful Relations with Ukraine

Towards the end of the discussion, fellows reflected on the ongoing war in Ukraine, with one fellow expressing concerns about geopolitical developments, including the oncoming Trump administration in the US and shifting priorities in Europe, which might pressure Ukraine into making concessions detrimental to its sovereignty and long-term stability. Drawing on Russia’s historical patterns, an argument was made that appeasement policies towards Russia would only delay inevitable conflict, warning that, “If the war in Ukraine ends by sacrificing Ukraine to Russia, we will end up with another war very soon—one that could be nuclear, more aggressive.”

Another fellow echoed this concern, cautioning that temporary resolutions to the war could create long-term instability. They argued that, “Even if you freeze the swamp to move forward, when a wolf comes along, it will crack the surface and drag you back into the swamp, pulling you in once again.” This analogy highlighted the risk of unresolved tensions in destabilising any fragile peace and highlighted the importance of addressing the root causes of the war. Building on this point, another contributor observed that none of the scenarios discussed during the workshop envisioned a Russia which has peaceful, neighbourly relations with Ukraine. They, therefore, stressed further the necessity of comprehensive security guarantees, advocating for a long-term, inclusive strategy towards Ukraine.

Key Takeaways and Future Considerations

The roundtable concluded with a shared recognition that envisioning a just and peaceful Russia requires collective effort. By integrating diverse contributions and maintaining a commitment to systemic change, the participants stressed the potential to forge pathways grounded in both pragmatic and aspirational approaches. The discussion further highlighted the significant challenges and opportunities in shaping the future of Russia, stressing the need to address foundational issues —such as governance, decentralisation, and societal cohesion—alongside managing immediate transitions. Although no singular vision for Russia’s future emerged, several points of consensus were identified, including the necessity of leadership accountability, the prioritisation of human rights, and the fostering of societal trust as central pillars of systemic transformation.

The inclusion of Russian exiles in discussions about the future of Russia is particularly significant, especially during a time when they face increasing danger and the risk of persecution. Their perspectives, informed by lived experience and a degree of detachment from the regime’s influence, provides invaluable insights into alternative approaches to governance and the reconstruction of Russian society in a post-Putin era. They, therefore, play a pivotal role in bridging international and domestic narratives, as demonstrated during this roundtable discussion.

Looking ahead, the workshop and subsequent roundtable discussion highlighted the importance of collaboration in shaping the future of Russia across disciplines, sectors, and geographies. Engaging Western policymakers and civil society actors in forward-thinking, coordinated strategies will be essential for navigating Russia’s transformation while prioritising the ongoing war in Ukraine and regional stability. Developing a unified vision that integrates diverse perspectives —both within and beyond Russia—necessitates a shared commitment to principles of justice and inclusion, as well as the courage to address complex and challenging questions about the country’s future.