As Putin marks a 25 years in leadership, one must consider whether he has effectively addressed the needs of Russia.

I will always remember New Year's Eve 1999.

At that time, I was serving as a producer in the BBC's Moscow bureau. Out of the blue, breaking news emerged: President Boris Yeltsin of Russia had announced his resignation.

This unexpected decision caught everyone off guard, including the British press corps stationed in Moscow. When the news was reported, there was no correspondent present in the office, which necessitated my involvement in writing and broadcasting my inaugural BBC dispatch.

Boris Yeltsin consistently asserted his intention to complete his full term in office, I noted. "However, today he informed the Russian people that he has reconsidered his position."

This marked the beginning of my journey as a journalist.

It also signified the commencement of Vladimir Putin's leadership in Russia.

After Yeltsin's resignation, as stipulated by the Russian constitution, Prime Minister Putin assumed the role of acting president. He subsequently secured victory in the election three months later.

Upon his departure from the Kremlin, Yeltsin's final directive to Putin was: "Ensure the well-being of Russia!"

I have increasingly found myself reflecting on Yeltsin's words as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine approaches its third anniversary.

This is largely due to the catastrophic impact of President Putin's extensive invasion of Ukraine.

The repercussions have been particularly severe for Ukraine, which has endured significant destruction and loss of life in its urban areas. Nearly 20% of the nation’s land has been seized, and approximately 10 million of its people have been forced to flee their homes.

But for Russia, too:

• Since Vladimir Putin's announcement to initiate what he termed a "special military operation," Russia has experienced significant casualties on the battlefield.
• Russian towns and cities are frequently subjected to drone assaults.
• goog_1077608769Ukrainian military forces have taken control of a section of the Kursk region in Russia.
• International sanctions are placing significant strain on the economy of Russia.
• The demographic situation in the country is, furthermore, quite alarming.
• Domestic repression has escalated rapidly.

I have been covering Vladimir Putin's tenure since he assumed leadership a quarter of a century ago.

On December 31, 1999, it would have been difficult to predict that Russia's newly appointed leader would remain in power for over twenty-five years. Furthermore, who could have anticipated that Russia would be engaged in conflict with Ukraine and confronting the West in the present day?

I frequently contemplate how the trajectory of history might have changed significantly had Yeltsin chosen a different successor. This inquiry, however, remains largely theoretical. History is replete with hypothetical scenarios and uncertainties.

What I can assert with confidence is that throughout the past twenty-five years, I have observed various iterations of Putin.

I am not alone in this observation.

"The Putin I engaged with, conducted successful business dealings alongside, and helped establish a NATO-Russia Council with, is markedly different from the almost megalomaniacal figure we see today," remarked former NATO chief Lord Robertson in 2023.

The individual who stood next to me in May 2002, asserting that Ukraine is a sovereign and independent nation capable of making its own security decisions, is now the same individual who claims that Ukraine does not qualify as a nation-state.

It is my belief that Vladimir Putin possesses a fragile ego coupled with significant ambitions for his country. The Soviet Union was acknowledged as the world's second superpower, a status that Russia can no longer claim. This reality, I believe, has deeply affected his self-esteem.

This may serve as one explanation for the transformation we have observed in Putin: his intense desire to "Make Russia Great Again" and to compensate for what many view as Moscow's defeat in the Cold War has placed Russia on a certain path of inevitable conflict with its neighbors and the West.

The Kremlin offers an alternative interpretation.

Based on his speeches and remarks, Putin seems motivated by a deep-seated resentment, characterized by a pervasive sentiment that Russia has been subjected to deception and disrespect for many years, with its security concerns overlooked by Western powers.

However, does Putin genuinely believe that he has honored Yeltsin's call to "take care of Russia"?

I recently had the opportunity to explore this matter.

After more than four hours of an extensive end-of-year press conference, President Putin extended an invitation for me to pose a question.

I reminded the president, "Boris Yeltsin entrusted you with the responsibility of caring for Russia. However, what about the considerable setbacks in your so-called 'special military operation', the Ukrainian forces in the Kursk region, the sanctions, and the soaring inflation? Do you believe you have adequately attended to your country's needs?"

President Putin responded, "Indeed, I have. Moreover, I have not only attended to it; we have also retreated from the brink of disaster."

He depicted Yeltsin's Russia as a nation that had been gradually relinquishing its sovereignty. He criticized the West for having "patronizingly patted" Yeltsin on the back while "exploiting Russia for its own interests." However, he asserted that he was "doing everything" possible to guarantee that Russia remained an independent sovereign state.

By positioning himself as the guardian of Russian sovereignty, one must consider whether this perspective is a retrospective justification for the conflict in Ukraine or if Putin genuinely holds this interpretation of contemporary Russian history.

I remain uncertain at this point. However, I perceive this as a crucial inquiry.

The resolution of this question may significantly impact the outcome of the war and the future trajectory of Russia.