A recently-released 2008 Pentagon-backed study has set the Internet aflame with the hypothesis that Russian President Vladimir V. Putin might have Asperger’s syndrome—an autism spectrum disorder characterized by social, behavioral and communicative difficulties. While there’s been a lot of talk in the Twittersphere discussing how ridiculous this “diagnosis” is, there’s also been quite a lot of fairly serious coverage of the report, all of which completely ignores its speculative and unscientific nature. As a Russia watcher with a son diagnosed with Asperger’s—and likely on the spectrum myself—I’m struck by how thoroughly the report and those who give it credence both demean people with Asperger’s and show a complete ignorance of Russian history and current affairs.
In his seminal 1944 study of children who exhibited obsessive interests, a domineering conversational style, clumsiness of movement and difficulty feeling empathy and forming friendships, Viennese child psychologist Dr. Hans Asperger referred to these children as “little professors,” as they could investigate and speak endlessly on those topics that engrossed them. That is true of my son, and of me—both as a child and now as an actual professor of political science. Perhaps it is that obsessiveness that motivated me to look further into this study of Putin.
It is best that Brenda Connors’ paper, “A Technical Report on the Nature of Movement Patterning, the Brain and Decision-Making,” was left to languish in a dusty, Defense Department archive, since it would never had made it through the rigorous peer-review process—either in the social sciences, psychology or the professional medical community.
First: the paper, beyond being sloppily written, full of typos and logical inconsistencies, with entire sections repeated verbatim, has no hypothesis, no claim that can be either substantiated or disproven with evidence. Indeed, that Vladimir Putin has Asperger’s is the foundational assumption at the start of the paper, rather than the conclusion reached at the end. “Vladimir Putin,” she writes, “is our focus because his movement patterns and his microexpressions, analyzed on open source video so clearly reveals that the Russian President carries a neurological abnormality, a profound behavioral challenge identified by leading neuroscientists as Asperger’s Syndrome, an autistic disorder which affects all of his decisions. His primary form of compensation is extreme control and this is isomorphically reflected in his decision style and how he governs.”
Beyond beginning with a conclusion, the paper tells us nothing about what these patterns and microexpressions are, how and by whom they’re interpreted and what basis exists for such a diagnosis from such evidence. Well, actually, we are given some evidence: Time’s “Person of the Year” article, which that mentions Putin’s cold, icy stare, his lack of charm, impatience and that he didn’t crack a joke.
And never mind that the main tool the author uses to diagnose the Russian leader, “Movement Pattern Analysis,” was pioneered by a 1930s Hungarian choreographer. Or that a study she uses to interpret invisible thoughts through movement was only published by something called “Dance & Movement Press.”
While not wanting to disparage unconventional research, I would not want to rely on these types of sources for making a serious autism diagnosis.
Still, the report asks us to believe that all of Putin’s political decisions and inclinations are singularly influenced by Asperger’s: his impatience, his wonkish attention to detail, his comfort with routine, his obsession with controlling the day-to-day operation of running a giant country, his “basic personal struggle” to find an inner circle he can trust, seeking glory for himself and the country he leads—all of it because of something that may or may not have happened when young Volodya was a child. This explanation overlooks the tomes of research in sociology, history, political science and Russian studies suggesting that such traits are all manifestations of the sistema of high-level autocratic politics in Russia—before Putin, under Putin and will continue after Putin—regardless of whether he has Asperger’s or not.
But here’s what I worry about most: In recent months, Vladimir Putin has become arguably America’s greatest foreign villain: invading and annexing Crimea, stoking anti-Western xenophobia at home, withstanding international sanctions for fueling the bloody war in Eastern Ukraine that resulted in the tragic downing of MH-17, thousands of Ukrainian deaths and a refugee crisis in the heart of Europe. American public opinion toward Putin has tanked, while experts struggle to explain this new belligerence coming from the closed-off autocrat behind the Kremlin walls. While I’m sure many have (rightly) dismissed the Pentagon study as the unscientific rubbish it is, there are others who are too primed to believe that America’s most vilified, opaque and misunderstood political rival should be singularly motivated by autism—America’s widely feared, opaque and misunderstood neurological condition. Putin is scary. Autism is scary. Put the two together, and you’ve got a story with legs, if not evidence.
It is not just Putin who gets further denigrated in all of this—it is those of us in the special-needs community, too. Sticking through the jargon of this Pentagon report is hurtful, unscientific and downright condescending terminology describing not just the Russian president, but individuals with Asperger’s and autism worldwide: “suffering” the “neurological insult” and “profound handicap” of Asperger’s, Putin is at a “primitive,” “pre-mammalian” and “reptilian stage of development.” Honestly, it’s so thoroughly insulting, the Pentagon should be ashamed to have paid for it.
And ultimately: So what? If, in the end, it turns out that Vladimir Putin is an Aspie—what does it matter? Can someone with Asperger’s not run a country? Certainly it’d be preferable if the Russian Federation were an actual, functioning, democratic federation, with decision-making power spread throughout the system—but it’s not. Russia is—and largely has been—a closed autocracy with most of the levers of power housed in the Kremlin. In that situation, it might actually be preferable to have someone who’s wired to be obsessively dedicated to the work of governance. In a 2008 hot-mic gaffe, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell claimed Janet Napolitano was perfectly suited for the onerous job of Secretary of Homeland Security, “because for that job, you have to have no life. ... She can devote, literally 19-20 hours a day to it.” Rendell’s words were impolite and embarrassing, but they also contained a grain of truth: For tough government jobs, you need people with tremendous dedication. In that way, Asperger’s may be an asset for politicians, entrepreneurs, managers and even professors, for whom dedication, hard work and an almost obsessive attention to detail are job requirements. Though it goes without saying that such a diagnosis neither explains nor excuses invading neighboring countries, annexing their territory or stoking a protracted land war.
At the end of the day, the Pentagon’s Asperger’s report was likely a waste of money that had very little impact on American foreign policy toward Russia. But the media firestorm that it has unleashed tells us that we still have far to go in how we understand autism here at home, and how we treat those of us who have it.
Mark Lawrence Schrad is assistant professor of political science at Villanova University and author of the new book Vodka Politics: Alcohol, Autocracy, and the Secret History of the Russian State.
