Remembering Gorbachev article

a Chapter in Messina, K., (Ed.) A Psychoanalytic Exploration of Projective Identification in the United States and in Russia. , 2023

History informs us that the malignant mental illness of autocratic leaders causes the worst avoidable suffering. It is the duty of experts to educate and warn of such dangers. One objective way to do so is to consider a person's capacity for mature leadership by assessing: weighting evidence, insightfulness, communication skills, making rational decisions, being realistic, high stress tolerance, resiliency and adaptation, good impulse control, and healthy standards and ideals. The Psychodiagnostic Chart (PDC-2) is the assessment tool of the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual (PDM-2). The PDC-2's Mental Functioning scales were used in this study since they show a high degree of utility for measuring these mental traits and are useful for informing the voting public. To test the utility of the Mental Function scales we used a purposive group of 50 mental health experts to rate Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This study demonstrated that the PDC-2's Mental Functioning scale was sensitive to both large and subtle differences in these political leaders. The Mental Functioning scale measured Volodymyr Zelenskyy with an over-all percentage of 91%. This indicates a psychologically healthy leader. Vladimir Putin’s average score was 41 % which is in the severe mental illness range. Donald Trump was rated at the 25% level of Mental Functioning or in the severe mental illness range. Putin and Trump both scored in the dangerous range in all 12 Mental Functions.

Global Society, 2017

This article contributes to the growing scholarly literature endeavouring to explain Russia's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. While much of the debate relies on the grand theories of International Relations such as realism, liberalism, or constructivism, this article approaches the puzzle from a psychological point of view and discusses several middle-range theories within this genre. These theories are examined sympathetically but critically, spelling out the added value they might have in elucidating Russian foreign policy, while also considering the methodological limitations in producing plausible explanations. Moreover, the article strives to overcome the traditional juxtaposition between the idea of rationality as a standard account of agency, and various psychological interpretations. Obvious methodological problems notwithstanding, the article concludes that cognitive and psychological featuressuch as the possibility of groupthink, assessment of prospects, operational codes and belief systems, personality characteristics, and emotionscan be applied to the Russian case and they can all explain Russia's higher willingness to take risks in the context of the Ukrainian crisis. In that way they can provide with partial explanations, and indeed are important elements of our understanding of Russian foreign policy in general and the Crimean case in particular.

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis

From the annexation of Georgia to the invasion of Ukraine or any operation that has occurred in the Russia's so-called spheres of privileged interests, what we can see is that the Russian foreign policy beneath Putin and his regime has gradually become more radical and aggressive than ever before during his tenure. Without any offensive intention, I argue that solely using the grand or mainstream theory of IR is literally not enough now to explain political behavior and decision-making of policy makers or leaders of the state, especially after Putin himself decided to invade Ukraine for the sake of 'Russian World'. Thus, shifting the level of analysis and considering the alternative factors may provide a deeper understanding of the circumstances, rather than just a superficial explanation. I would like to propose that the annexation of Russia to its so-called spheres of privileged interests, in this essay the author will be narrated on story of the Georgia annexation, could use the theoretical framework of psychological approach, to comprehend and analyze why Putin has decided to declare and enforce such assertive foreign policy. This paper will employ the methodology of content analysis of the secondary textual material to analyze and measure emotion or other factors within. To measure effectively I will interpret and consider the texts based on three criteria. Firstly, his personal background information, including his working experience with the KGB. The Soviet legacies left in Putin's mind in the creation of concurrently 'Russian World'. Secondly, examining the cost of committing warfare on Georgia to determine if it's reasonable or not, If the cost of warfare is probably worthless compared to ordinary foreign policy to counter other nations. Then the analysis will consider the state's foreign policies, including emotional decision-making not just pure rationality. Lastly, similar to the second criterion, attention will be given to status recognition: the use of language such as 'political identity', compatriot or even 'Russian World' that can be seen in the texts and how it informs Putin's foreign policy towards its sphere of interests or the West. If such of terminology is present, it is likely that the state's foreign policies include emotional decision-making, not just purely rationality. I would like to remind readers that there are limitations of the psychology theory or even emotional approach, as mentioned above that this paper will be interpreted by using the secondary textual material. Thus, there's still a challenge about its material reliability which cannot be as concrete as using first-hand material.

Chapter in Messina, K., (Ed.) A Psychoanalytic Study of Political Leadership in the United States and Russia: Searching for Truth. Routledge, ISBN: 9781032637822, 2024

History informs us that the malignant mental illness of autocratic leaders causes the worst avoidable suffering. It is the duty of experts to educate and warn of such dangers. One objective way to do so is to consider a person's capacity for mature leadership by assessing: weighting evidence, insightfulness, communication skills, making rational decisions, being realistic, high stress tolerance, resiliency and adaptation, good impulse control, and healthy standards and ideals. The Psychodiagnostic Chart (PDC-2) is the assessment tool of the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual (PDM-2). The PDC-2's Mental Functioning scales were used in this study since they show a high degree of utility for measuring these mental traits and are useful for informing the voting public. To test the utility of the Mental Function scales we used a purposive group of 50 mental health experts to rate Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This study demonstrated that the PDC-2's Mental Functioning scale was sensitive to both large and subtle differences in these political leaders. The Mental Functioning scale measured Volodymyr Zelenskyy with an over-all percentage of 91%. This indicates a psychologically healthy leader. Vladimir Putin’s average score was 41 % which is in the severe mental illness range. Donald Trump was rated at the 25% level of Mental Functioning or in the severe mental illness range. Putin and Trump both scored in the dangerous range in all 12 Mental Functions.

The foreign policy of the states is influenced by many important factors, including political, economic, social, military and cultural ones. However, the personality of the political leaders of these states is one of the most influential factors. At times, the personality factor changes cardinally the process of making foreign policy decisions, the foreign policy style and the behavior of the state in the system of the international relations. Time and again, we came across it in the history of the international relations. Today, we are trying to predict the development of the U.S.-Russian relations when two new, young and ambitious presidents, Barrack Obama and Dimitry Medvedev, appeared on the scene.

Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin has burst into the limelight of the political sphere. Most recently, due to allegations of influencing the 2016 election of U.S. President

The war in Ukraine has seized international public opinion by its brutal irruption and its generalized violence against Ukrainian society. This invasion provoked the awareness of Vladimir Putin's inordinate will to power, which burst into the open after the underestimation of his plan to invade this neighboring country for many months prior to the outbreak of the war on February 24, 2022, despite the warnings of the Anglo-Saxon intelligence services. How to explain this lasting ignorance of Putin's warlike intentions without asking the questions of who this man is, how he came to these irrational and inhuman extremes? How did the Russian political system allow the accession to supreme power of a man who was labeled as "gray" at the beginning, especially after his training in the KGB, where his GRU department officials decided to bar him as "unsuitable for the functions of a KGB agent" because of his inability to dominate his deep negative impulses and his thirst for domination by any means? What were the ingredients and origins of his progressive pathological drift? Can we still deduce what he thinks of the situation created by the invasion of Ukraine, a "special operation" badly thought out with regard to a people and a country denied in their essence, and now transformed into a total war of attrition? It is difficult to give an opinion on such a conflict and its future outcome, but on the other hand, it is possible to deepen the analysis of Putin's personality through his acts, his postures, to better understand him, this is what this article proposes, without claiming to go beyond and cover the global geopolitical situation.

ASSRJ, 2022

The aim of this article is to analyze the recent Russian behavior from a historical, cultural and psychological perspective in the attempt to better understand the sudden shift from a western oriented policy to the rejection of the West and the shift toward the East. In the West, progress has been conceived as a process of controlled linear change in the hope to develop and improve prosperity and wellbeing along the arrow of time. On the other hand, any change has been always conceived as an eschatological overturning in Russia, where the previous condition is radically refused and the new one is the result of its turn upside down. On psychological standpoint, this dual structure seems to depend on proneness to splitting and inability to integrate the opposites-a behavior similar to primary defense mechanisms of the infants that may persist in adult life. The Russian psychocultural inclination to a dual axiological structure also is in line with the dualist Orthodox religious belief, contemplating only heaven and hell and denying purgatory. The above century-old dual structure of Russian mentality is also compatible with Putin's dual behavior, initially reproaching the West and then radically refusing it as a sort of absolute evil.