As Russia navigated 2024, the Kremlin faced a complex web of internal political risks that reshaped its governance and influence. These challenges, ranging from elite loyalty issues to security threats, underscored the delicate balance of power within the nation. Below, we analyze five key risks that defined the Kremlin’s concerns and strategies during that year.
1. Risk of Diminished Loyalty Within the Elite
Since February 2022, this risk continues to be a critical concern for the Kremlin. Despite claims of elite consolidation during the Special Military Operation (SMO), authorities still view loyalty within the elite as a significant issue.
This concern is evident in increased funding for state programs, national projects, and major businesses, coupled with a growing number of criminal cases against officials and businesspeople. The indefinite timeframe for cases involving asset nationalization tied to corruption further reflects this approach. For example, targeted actions have included conflicts like that between Severstal and Vologda Governor Filimonov.
To maintain control, the Kremlin emphasizes public displays of authority over the elite and takes preemptive measures against perceived opponents. This strategy includes intensified repression of liberal adversaries, heightened scrutiny over cultural, artistic, and academic figures, and leveraging morality campaigns as a tool for influence.
2. Risks from Elite Transformation and Rising Influence of SMO Veterans and Nationalists
The Kremlin faces growing challenges from SMO veterans seeking political agency and nationalist or far-right movements pushing for influence. While the Russian elite resists these trends, the Kremlin is adapting by balancing demands for representation with efforts to prevent uncontrollable dynamics.
A notable strategy involves replacing genuine SMO veterans with individuals from existing elite circles who carry symbolic military service credentials. This approach seeks to maintain stability while addressing calls for inclusivity.
One significant casualty of this shift was United Russia General Council head Andrey Turchak. He underestimated President Putin’s emphasis on rejuvenating the elite through “military patriots.” Despite his rational assessment of the situation, Turchak failed to anticipate emerging trends, particularly the ambitions of Rostec’s Sergey Chemezov to replace St. Petersburg Governor Beglov, ultimately leading to his political downfall.
3. Risks of Declining Government Efficiency and a Return to the 1990s
Demonstrating effectiveness remains vital for the regime as it aims to project control over economic trends, import substitution, and other key areas.
President Putin personally drives narratives of success, while negative developments are carefully excluded from public discourse. Polling agencies like VTsIOM and FOM disseminate a “loyalist narrative” to reinforce the perception of a successful government. Meanwhile, regulatory agencies and the government limit access to economic and statistical data, with Rosstat developing new methodologies to align with the narrative.
However, this “bubble of success” risks creating unrealistic scenarios. It may lead to inaccurate forecasts and mismanagement of resources, potentially undermining long-term governance.
4. Risk of Terrorist Threats
The March 2024 terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall was a major shock for Russian security services, especially as U.S. intelligence had issued prior warnings. While the FSB’s counterterrorism unit, supported by Kazakhstan’s KNB, neutralized two of three terrorist cells, the third carried out the attack, resulting in a tragic outcome.
This failure prompted criticism from President Putin, leaving General Sedov of the FSB’s Second Service on the brink of dismissal for much of the year. The attack also triggered an unprecedented crackdown on migrants, heightening diplomatic tensions with Central Asian nations like Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. These measures strained Russia’s labor market and contributed to rising inflation.
To mitigate further risks, the Kremlin pursued covert agreements with the Taliban and informal armed groups. Another high-profile incident was the assassination of General Kirillov, head of the Radiation, Chemical, and Biological Defense Forces—the first murder of an active Russian general in Moscow. This act underscored the increasing radicalization of Ukrainian sabotage groups operating within Russia, further straining relations between Putin and the security services.
5. Risks of Conflicts in the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia
Rising tensions along the Chechnya-Ingushetia/Dagestan line highlight the federal government’s growing loss of control over regional actors. This instability is compounded by Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov’s deteriorating health, which has fueled uncertainty in the region.
Russia’s influence in the South Caucasus has also weakened, with Turkey gaining ground. Relations with Armenia have soured, while ties with Azerbaijan deteriorated after an Azerbaijani Airlines plane was shot down by Chechen air defense systems.
In Abkhazia, Turkish influence has grown significantly. Deputy Chief of Staff Dmitry Kozak suggested a contentious plan for integrating Georgia and Abkhazia in exchange for guarantees that Georgia would maintain a pro-Russian stance. While Georgian oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili appeared to support the initiative, it faced resistance from pro-European factions within Georgia.
Despite these challenges, the likelihood of Russia losing Georgia remains moderate, thanks in part to the neutral stance of the Georgian population.
In 2024, the Kremlin grapples with an intricate array of internal risks that could reshape its political landscape. From elite loyalty issues to external influences in volatile regions, the stakes are high. How effectively the Kremlin navigates these challenges will determine not only the stability of Russia’s governance but also its standing on the global stage.
