In a recent issue of The Economist, one of Russia’s richest men set out why the West should worry less about Ukraine and more about Russia. In an opinion piece and nearly 60 hours of interviews, the sanctioned oligarch Andrey Melnichenko argues that “broken Russia” would be bad for the world. In his account, the war did not begin because Russia chose to invade; it began when trust between great powers broke down, at which point “politics does not direct events; it is led by them.” Ukraine appears mostly as scenery. That is a sophisticated version of long-established trickery allowing Russia to escape accountability for its crimes.JOIN US ON TELEGRAMFollow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official. Western media have developed a weird habit. Russia invades Ukraine, but headlines often say “Putin” did. Russian missiles kill civilians, but are then called “Putin’s missiles.” And the pattern continues. This is a factual error, a moral dishonesty, and a strategic mistake. Putin ordered the invasion. But he is not personally flying fighter-bombers, developing lethal drones, and celebrating murderous missile strikes on TV. Russians do that: Russian officers, Russian engineers, and Russian journalists. This is Russia’s war. Meekly calling it “Putin’s war” is preposterous and negligent. Putin does not wage war alone “Putin’s war” may sound fitting because Russia is a dictatorship. It is inaccurate because, for all the tawdry uniform posturing by Putin, wars are not fought by dictators. Russia’s war is fought by its army, and depends on millions of Russian men and women who keep the war machine running. Moreover, a seemingly victorious initial onslaught drew undeniable public support, with only cracks in the triumphant narratives causing visible discontent (more on that later).