Geostrategic Media Political Commentary, Analysis, Security, Defense
Few people in modern politics have drawn as much attention and controversy as Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Even though Putin comes from an autocratic country and Trump comes from a democracy with robust institutional checks and balances, their leadership philosophies, language, and effects on their respective countries are quite similar. We can see how their paths are similar, how Putin’s path can be used as a guide to forecast Trump’s future actions, and what democratic cultures can do to buck these trends.
Similar Populist Rhetoric and Nationalist Appeals
Both Trump and Putin have built their political careers on nationalist rhetoric to position themselves as champions of the ‘real’ people against corrupt elites. Trump’s “Make America Great Again” and Putin’s revival of Russian imperial pride share the same underlying message: reclaiming national greatness by fighting against globalist forces. Their supporters see them as defenders of traditional values against liberal (Trump) or Western (Putin) influences that threaten national identity.
Disdain for Democratic Norms
Despite leading different types of governments, both leaders have shown animosity towards democratic institutions when they challenge their authority. Trump urged attempts to change the election results, refused to accept defeat in 2020, and frequently questioned the validity of the American electoral process. The U.S. Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, when his supporters invaded Congress in an attempt to invalidate the election results, was the climax of this discourse. This incident, which is generally viewed as an assault on democracy, is similar to Putin’s use of force to keep power and repress opposition.
Putin, meanwhile, has extended his control through constitutional amendments, manipulated elections, and methodically destroyed democratic opposition. Both leaders have blurred the lines between legal authority and personal power, testing the resilience of their respective systems. But it’s crucial to recognize that they differ greatly from one another. So yet, Trump’s more authoritarian inclinations have not been able to overcome the U.S. system’s well-established checks and balances. The United States has a more independent judiciary, a free press, and a decentralized electoral system that acts as a check against pure authoritarianism, in contrast to Russia, where power is centralized in the hands of the Kremlin.
Weaponization of Media and Cults of Personality
Putin and Trump are both skilled manipulators of the media. Trump used social media to directly control the narrative and frequently attacked the press as the “enemy of the people,” which made his supporters distrust independent journalism. Putin, on the other hand, has repressed independent journalism and promoted conspiracy theories that support Kremlin objectives by transforming Russian official media into a propagandist apparatus. Putin has influenced public opinion through state-run media channels like RT and Sputnik, whereas Trump has relied on Fox News and alternative media ecosystems.
Additionally, both leaders have created personality cults. Trump’s celebrity persona was closely linked to his administration, as he used his existing notoriety and corporate empire to portray himself as successful. Similarly, Putin has built a mythology around his strength, projecting an image of himself as a courageous leader through his tough-guy statements on international issues or staged demonstrations of physical capability. Their supporters frequently see them as heroic individuals battling an unjust system rather than as traditional politicians. With the notable similarities in their leadership styles and rhetoric now outlined, the question is whether Putin’s trajectory can provide clues about Trump’s potential future actions.
Putin’s Playbook: Legal Printer” and Ultimatums
Putin came to power with the rhetoric of safety, initiating the second war in Chechnya. Since then, he has frequently used the concept of conflict, always searching for adversaries within and outside of Russia. By portraying his leadership as essential to stability and national security, this strategy has enabled him to solidify his grip on power. Trump follows the same modus operandi, currently using economic war threats as a tool to rally his base and justify aggressive policy measures, such as trade tariffs and economic sanctions.
Trump’s approach to governance bears striking similarities to Putin’s ‘legal printer’ strategy, where an overwhelming volume of laws, decrees, and executive orders—many of them classified—are issued at a rapid pace. Putin’s government prints around 600 laws annually, along with hundreds of decrees and orders, many of them secret to avoid public scrutiny. Trump’s aggressive use of executive orders, including 72 in his first month back in office, mirrors this tactic. This rapid pace aims to overwhelm institutional checks before they can effectively respond.
At the start of Trump’s presidency, the U.S. initially attempted to persuade Ukraine to align with his vision—both in terms of regional stability and resource access. When persuasion failed, conditions were imposed, and now, the approach has escalated to outright blackmail. This mirrors Trump’s broader political trajectory, where he shifts from negotiation to coercion when met with resistance. The irony is that his tactics are strikingly similar to Putin’s. Just as Ukraine defied Putin’s ultimatums, it was at the stage of imposed conditions and threats that Kyiv pushed back against Trump’s demands. While his aggressive rhetoric serves to strengthen his image, he has yet to take the decisive step into full-scale conflict.
The Trump-Musk Political Alignment Will Not Last
Putin’s early friendships with important individuals, such as Dmitry Medvedev and Sergei Ivanov, who were eventually dropped once Putin established his authority, are one notable historical resemblance. Trump’s strong political ties to individuals like Elon Musk may also go a similar course. Trump might fire Musk after he believes he has overthrown the so-called “Deep State,” much like Putin did with his erstwhile supporters. Trump’s prior betrayals of allies like Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, and even Mike Pence demonstrate that he has no allegiance to people who have helped him ascend in the political hierarchy. Musk’s political usefulness will ultimately run out.
Could Trump Resort to Full-Scale Conflict?
Putin used military interventions in Georgia (2008), Crimea (2014), and Ukraine (2022) to solidify his authoritarian control. Trump, too, has already expressed a willingness to challenge the limits of presidential power. Wishing to stay in power beyond the legally permitted term, he is intentionally disrupting the system by exploiting legal loopholes, issuing executive orders that contradict existing laws, and daring courts to keep up. Following Putin’s recipe, courts are overwhelmed and Congress is under Republican control; Trump is steadily moving toward consolidating unchecked power.
Like Putin, who manipulated Russia’s legal framework to stay in power indefinitely, Trump could be tempted to follow a similar path—whether by pressuring key government institutions, reshaping legal interpretations, or even attempting constitutional changes. If such a scenario unfolds, the need to maintain control could push him toward more drastic measures, including military conflict. Wishing to keep the power, the pressures of maintaining control could push him toward direct intervention, just as Putin escalated conflicts to consolidate his own rule. With the parallels between Trump and Putin and the potential trajectory for Trump now examined, it is crucial to consider the wider implications of these trends and to outline the necessary actions to safeguard democratic values.
Time Is on the Side of Democracy, But Action Is Needed
While Trump and Putin operate in different political landscapes, their similarities highlight broader global trends of rising authoritarianism, populist backlash against liberal democracies, and the erosion of democratic norms. Both leaders have cultivated loyal followings by positioning themselves as anti-establishment figures, using media as a tool of control, and challenging institutional checks on their power.
Trump’s next steps may involve restructuring the judiciary and consolidating legislative power, mirroring Putin’s transformation of Russia’s political system. While he currently maintains formal compliance with court rulings, history suggests that his appetite for control will only grow. Just as Putin gradually eliminated legal opposition and centralized decision-making, Trump’s maneuvers suggest a similar long-term strategy.
However, history has shown that tyranny is not sustainable indefinitely. As the Roman statesman Marcus Porcius Cato the Younger once said, “Time (…) erodes the strength of all tyranny.” While time may be on the side of democracy, it may take too long for it to act alone. It is up to us—citizens, institutions, and democratic movements—to actively oppose tyranny, safeguard our freedoms, and ensure that autocratic models do not take hold in places where democracy still has the chance to flourish.
The most critical question is whether American, European, and global democratic institutions can counteract this authoritarian mentality. If history is any guide, we cannot afford to wait and hope for democracy to prevail on its own. Strengthening independent media and fact-based journalism, reinforcing democratic norms of electoral integrity and peaceful transitions of power, and ensuring that institutions resist authoritarian capture must be a priority.
Putin’s 25-year trajectory provides a clear warning for what Trump’s America could become. The question is: Will we recognize the danger and act, or will we be forced to learn from history the hard way?
