This NYT article indirectly confirms the suspicion that the US, despite the allegedly positive “reset” of the US/ Russian relationship of a few years ago, has ultimately had a hostile attitude toward the Russian political establishment for quite some time.
Why has so much effort been spent on uncovering the private wealth of a supposedly friendly, or at least neutral head of state? As far as we know at Patapaa, the US has never investigated the private finances of supposedly friendly heads of state that were actually convicted in their own countries of corruption, such as Silvio Berlusconi and Jacques Chirac.
Moreover, this investigation is quite meaningless. As is the case with many billionaires (if Putin is, in fact, a billionaire), his manipulation of money is more a function of power than of financing a luxurious lifestyle. It ultimately makes no difference to him if the money is actually his; what matters to him is access to funds he can use as an exercise of power.
The NYT article is an informative piece and reveals something very interesting, and it is not about Mr. Putin (we all knew he was not poor) and not about the amount of wealth that he might have (we all knew that it was not about a few millions here and there).
It is actually about the world order in which we live. To summarize this in a few words: The world is run by politicians who have ties to international wealth. The world is no longer about ideas–liberalism, communism, whatever.
The world is about money, and the more the better. I find it ironic that in order to keep the world safe (that is, restore the territory of Ukraine and keep its borders safe from aggression) all the US does and can do is threaten the pocketbook of Mr. Putin.
