Fiona Hill met Vladimir Putin several times as senior advisor to three U.S. presidents. In this unique interview with the Institute of Art and Ideas, Dr Hill explains Putin’s multiple identities, how he views NATO, why John Mearsheimer’s school of realism and international relations theory fails to explain the invasion, and what our strategy should be towards China and Taiwan.

People tend to have a very specific view of who Vladimir Putin is. Some say that he is an imperial strongman, others that he is a leader rationally defending his country’s self-interests, and some that he is a dictator gone crazy. However, you have argued that Putin is best understood as a composite of multiple identities. What finally led you to this conclusion after meeting him several times?

Public figures always have motivations ascribed to them, and, to be frank, observers tend to project their own views, opinions and perceptions from a distance. Often they hone in on the most obvious attribute. But no-one is one dimensional. Everyone is multifacted, and most people are products of their time and place. When you are in closer physical proximity to someone and have the chance to observe them in action, its easier to see that. Vladimir Putin is not that extraordinary for someone of his generational cohort and from his particular background. What is extraordinary is how he has risen to the top of Russian politics and managed to stay in place for such a long time. Determining which personal and professional attributes have enabled him to do so is the key to understanding him and how he operates.