Why Won’t Russia Sever Its Agreements With Western Organizations?

Andrew Korybko 

The world order that Russia is fighting for is one in which it’s on equal military-political terms with the West and then peacefully erodes Western economic hegemony through BRICS in order to gradually herald multipolarity

Putin’s Plenipotentiary Representative to the Duma Garry Minkh told TASS in late August that “Specialized ministries are against the denunciation of our partnership [agreements] with NATO, or global financial organizations, including the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank.” The rationale is that they “have not exhausted their potential” and Putin wants to keep dialogue open with them. TASS also reported that Minkh said that Russia always takes responsibility for its obligations, unlike the West.

This policy reaffirmation probably surprised many “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” (NRPRs), who were misled by the top influencers among them to believe that Russia has been a revolutionary state since 2022, ergo their expectation that it already severed these agreements long ago. That was an alternative reality carefully crafted by top NRPR influencers to generate clout, push an ideology, and/or solicit donations with a wink from Russia’s “soft power supervisors” per the “Potemkinist” soft power approach.

This concept refers to the creation of such alternative realities for strategic purposes, which can cynically be described as getting the largest number of foreigners to support Russia even if only on false premises such as the infamous one of Putin supposedly being a secret anti-Zionist. Ethical and strategic concerns aside, of which there are many and they should urgently be discussed among the NRPR community, it’s important to clarify the objectively existing political-legal reality that Minkh raised wider awareness of.

While Russia is indeed challenging Western unipolarity through its special operation, which was initially aimed primarily at neutralizing the Ukrainian-emanating threats from NATO that were designed to place Russia in a position of perpetual strategic blackmail as explained here, its challenge isn’t absolute. From the get-go, as proven by the demands from Putin on down to rescind all of the sanctions, Russia always expected to resume its trade (including energy) and investment ties with the West.

The difference from before the special operation and what was envisaged for afterwards, however, is that Russia would have been their equal military-political partner after achieving its maximum goals. Russia would then benefit from its ties with them (such as maintaining post-war stability in Europe as regards NATO) while reforming them from within (as regards the economic ones) simultaneously with leading the creation of alternative non-Western institutions through BRICS and the like.

Russia’s grand strategic goal has always been to accelerate multipolar processes. What top NRPR influencers rarely clarified, if at all, is that this is meant to proceed incrementally so as to maximally reduce the risk of systemic shocks that could then backfire against Russia’s interests. The world order that Russia is fighting for is one in which it’s on equal military-political terms with the West and then peacefully erodes Western economic hegemony through BRICS in order to gradually herald multipolarity.

Regardless of whatever one’s opinion about this grand strategic goal and the gradual pace thereof may be, it’s veritably the policy that Russia has formulated and is actively implementing, both then and now. In pursuit of this, Russia must thus retain its agreements with Western organizations in order to advance the future world order that it envisages, which is an explanation and not an excuse, to be clear. If Russia eventually severs such agreements, however, then it would signify a radical shift in its grand strategy.

Andrew Korybko, Substack, September 14, 2026

Anteriores:
Why Won’t China Cut Ukraine Off From Drone-Related Sales? 
The Leipzig Incident Has All The Hallmarks Of A False Flag 
Who’d Expect To Gain More From A Serious Escalation: NATO Or Russia? 
Is Sikorski’s “European Legion” Proposal A Way For Poland To Deploy “Peacekeepers” To Ukraine? 
A Pragmatically Amended 1956 Compromise Could Speedily Resolve The Kuril Islands Issue 
Would Russia Really Cease To Exist Without Maximum Victory In The Ukrainian Conflict? 
Korybko To MAGA: Here’s A Quick Clarification Of Russia’s Policies On Issues Of Importance 
What’s Driving Germany’s Planned €800 Billion Remilitarization? 
Poles Shouldn’t Let Themselves Be Duped By Zelensky’s Dishonest Reconciliation Attempt