• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Alexey Malashenko"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Russia",
    "Eastern Europe",
    "Ukraine"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

As the Olympics Come to an End, So Does the Post-Soviet Space

The collapse of the Yanukovych regime in Ukraine became another posthumous chapter in the breakup of the Soviet Union. It will severely curtail Russia’s leadership ambitions in the post-Soviet space.

Link Copied
By Alexey Malashenko
Published on Feb 27, 2014

The Sochi Olympics were more successful than was expected: the Putin Security Team scored a clean sweep victory over the Potential Terrorist Club, while the Team Russia has won the record number of Olympic medals.

But with that came the Ukrainian events, drowning the Russian Olympic victory in their storm. President Vladimir Putin got saddled with the Kiev Maidan before he even got a chance to bask in his Olympic glory.

The Olympic Games are over, while the Ukrainian race is just getting underway. It is hard to predict how it will end, but one thing is clear: there is no more Ukraine as we once knew it, nor will there ever be. The Maidan victory is reformatting post-Soviet Ukraine, creating a new state in its place. Perhaps, there will even be several quasi-state formations, which may change Eastern Europe’s political landscape.

All of the international actors want Ukraine to remain a unified nation state, thus staving off the Yugoslav scenario (that being said, the term “Yugoslavization of Ukraine” is already floating in the media). However, the internal rift between “the East” and “the West” will be a fixture on the Ukrainian scene in the near future. Besides, the Ukrainian Parliament has clearly jumped the gun with its repeal of the recently-adopted Russian language law. The responsible segment of the former opposition will soon realize that it should proceed more cautiously now. The euphoric feelings will soon wear off. The victors have already figured that Ukraine will need a 35-billion-euro stabilization package. It will be hard to cobble this sum together, even with Europe willing to help. Then Russia is also likely to get involved.

How will the Kremlin act? The Russian ruling class cannot help but notice an entirely different state “suddenly” appearing at Russia’s western borders. The Russian President Vladimir Putin must come to this realization after the initial shock that came at the close of the Olympics. Siding with President Viktor Yanukovych, who set his partner up and fled, as well as other mistakes by the Kremlin, have made the changes in Ukraine irreversible. But Moscow will eventually recognize any Ukrainian regime under the pretext of “respecting people’s choice.” Just remember the recognition of the Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood—an organization outlawed in Russia. Most likely, Moscow will not wait until the May elections to recognize the new Ukrainian regime; waiting for too long may have only negative ramifications.

The Ukrainian events are certain to have an impact on Russia and Russian society. This impact may vary. First, the Russians saw that an authoritarian or borderline authoritarian regime may be defeated by harsh, radical means. This time it happened an 8-hour train ride away from Moscow, not in some remote Kyrgyzstan. Second, putting Yanukovych’s palace on display in the media and on the Internet makes one wonder about the conditions his more powerful Russian counterpart is living in. As the saying goes, “tell me who your friend is…” This aspect may have an indirect negative effect on the Russian president’s rating, although now, according to Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM), it has risen to 67 percent. Third, as a reaction to the Ukrainian “rebels’” success, the Russian authorities may embark on another round of repressive measures. Even before the Maidan victory, some experts predicted regime’s shift into a more repressive mode right after the Olympics. But it actually began even earlier, before the Sochi Games were over, at least with respect to the media. Fourth, the rise of Ukrainian nationalism will facilitate the growth of Russian nationalism. In any event, analyzing the influence of Ukrainian developments on the situation in Russia will become a hot topic for journalists and political pundits. So we will certainly see a lot of exciting and controversial commentaries, as well as some useful analysis.

But we can already identify a very painful problem Moscow will face. The collapse of the Yanukovych regime in Ukraine followed by the country’s obvious turn to Europe will severely curtail Russia’s leadership ambitions in the post-Soviet space and cast doubt on its integration course. Having watched the Ukrainian struggle closely, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Armenia could assess the range of Russia’s capabilities, its helplessness, and inability to realize its ambitions. Perhaps, the Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko has started giving some thought to his future as well. In a sense, the February of 2014 became another posthumous chapter in the breakup of the Soviet Union, furthering the demise of the post-Soviet space. This is probably the major takeaway from the Ukrainian changes.

About the Author

Alexey Malashenko

Former Scholar in Residence, Religion, Society, and Security Program

Malashenko is a former chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Religion, Society, and Security Program.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    What Will Uzbekistan’s New President Do?

      Alexey Malashenko

  • Commentary
    Preserving the Calm in Russia’s Muslim Community

      Alexey Malashenko

Alexey Malashenko
Former Scholar in Residence, Religion, Society, and Security Program
Alexey Malashenko
Political ReformForeign PolicyRussiaEastern EuropeUkraine

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Commentary
    NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions Simmer

    On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.

      Tejas Bharadwaj

  • Commentary
    Indian Airstrikes in Pakistan: May 7, 2025

    On May 7, 2025, between 1:05 and 1:30 a.m. (IST), airstrikes carried out by the Indian Air Force hit nine locations inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). It was codenamed Operation Sindoor.

      Rudra Chaudhuri

  • Research
    Views From Taipei: Essays by Young Indian Scholars on China

    This compendium brings together three essays by scholars who participated in Carnegie India's Security Studies Dialogue in 2024, each examining a different aspect of China’s policies. Drawing on their expertise and research, the authors offer fresh perspectives on key geopolitical challenges.

      • +1

      Vijay Gokhale, Suyash Desai, Amit Kumar, …

  • Commentary
    The India-U.S. TRUST Initiative: Advancing Semiconductor Supply Chain Cooperation

    As part of the TRUST initiative, leaders of the two countries committed to building trusted and resilient supply chains, including for semiconductors and critical minerals. India and the United States have made steady progress in this area over the years. This essay explores the takeaways from discussions on semiconductor supply chains that took place at Carnegie India’s 9th Global Technology Summit.

      Konark Bhandari

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.