President Vladimir Putin is known for surrounding himself with a loyal cadre of officials and aides, many of whom have stood by him throughout his extensive tenure of over 23 years. This intimate inner circle has been integral to his governance style, fostering a sense of camaraderie and trust that he demands from those closest to him.

Putin has openly expressed his expectation of unwavering loyalty from his associates. In a varied 2018 interview, when asked if he could forgive mistakes, his response was telling: “Yes. But not everything.” When pressed by journalist Andrei Kondrashov on what he could not forgive, Putin’s reply was unequivocal: “Betrayal.” This illustrates the heavy weight he places on loyalty.

For those who have been part of Putin’s administration for more than two decades, it is clear that he highly values and demands loyalty from his inner circle. Most of these individuals have been by his side since his early days rising through the ranks of Russia’s Soviet security service, the KGB, which speaks volumes about the longstanding relationships he cultivates.

“Neither in our country nor abroad have I seen bosses who keep disloyal people around them,” stated Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s press secretary, in an interview with CNBC.

“However, for Vladimir Putin, loyalty alone is insufficient. He requires three essential qualities: 1. Professionalism, 2. Efficiency, 3. Loyalty,” he elaborated in his emailed remarks, emphasizing the multifaceted nature of loyalty in Putin’s regime.

Peskov, a prominent Kremlin official regarded as a key member of Putin’s inner circle, has served as press secretary for an impressive 23 years. In addition, many people within Putin’s inner circle—often referred to as “Siloviki,” meaning “people of force,” which highlights their backgrounds in military or security services—have predominantly been loyal to the Russian leader for many years, managing the suppression of dissenting voices and movements that challenge his authority.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has held his position since 2004, while Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has been in office since 2012, previously considered a potential successor to Putin himself. This continuity in leadership reflects the entrenched loyalty within the Russian government.

Putin’s inner circle also includes Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, along with the heads of Russia’s state security services, including the FSB and its foreign intelligence counterpart, the SVR. Additionally, there are ideologically significant propagandists like Vladimir Solovyov and Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council.

The council’s deputy is the nationalist Dmitry Medvedev, who previously served as Russia’s president and prime minister until 2012, sharing power with Putin. While Medvedev has historically been subordinate to Putin, he remains a close ally and a vocal supporter of Russia’s ongoing conflict in Ukraine and its ideological rivalry with the West.

Experts on Russian politics argue that qualities such as competence and loyalty may not carry equal weight within the Kremlin. Scholar and historian Sergei Medvedev notes that “loyalty has always been more important than competence” in the Russian political landscape.

“Russia does not operate as an efficiency-oriented, competency-driven meritocracy,” Medvedev, author of “A War Made in Russia” and “The Return of the Russian Leviathan,” explained. “It’s a very archaic and medieval—almost Byzantine in its complexity—system of personal loyalty, and Putin will retain anyone—even the most inefficient leaders like former president Dmitry Medvedev, as long as they demonstrate their loyalty,” Medvedev shared with CNBC.

Former Russian opposition leader Vladimir Milov, who once served in the Energy Ministry in 2002, has become disillusioned with the direction Russia has taken under Putin. He now strongly identifies as part of Russia’s largely exiled or imprisoned opposition movement, living abroad.

Having closely observed Putin, Milov asserted that the president “100%” values loyalty over competence and pointed out that “professionalism and efficiency are merely the other sides of being able to challenge the status quo.”

“If you disagree with the current situation, you want to improve it, and you utilize your skills and decisiveness to effect change. This is not how Putin prefers things to operate. He is the sole individual entitled to make changes or maintain the status quo,” Milov stated.

He elaborated that Putin’s demand for absolute loyalty stems from profound insecurity and fear of rivalry.

“This represents one of the major challenges,” he informed CNBC. “From my personal experience of interacting with him, I can confirm that he is an exceptionally unremarkable individual. He prefers individuals who are as average as possible, making him extremely insecure when faced with open competition or the demonstration of superior talent.”

Milov believes Putin is inherently paranoid about potential plots to unseat him, noting that the unspoken rule among those around him is to avoid standing out too much or posing a threat.

“In general, if there is a guideline, it is: ‘don’t stick your head out, because I will then immediately perceive you as competition, and I will obliterate that competition’—that’s his approach,” he concluded.

Experts highlight that a strong emphasis on loyalty can lead to blind spots, as evidenced by the unfortunate consequences of the invasion of Ukraine and the rise in power and influence of Yevgeny Prigozhin before his downfall.

When Russia initiated its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, analysts suggested that Putin had likely been misled by his closest military officials, who assured him that the operation would be swift and that Ukraine would capitulate quickly, allowing for a pro-Russian government to be installed in Kyiv.

However, within just a few weeks of the conflict, it became clear that Ukraine was mounting a far stronger resistance and receiving more support from its allies than the Russian leadership had anticipated.

During Russia’s so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine, questions have arisen regarding the strategy and effectiveness of Russia’s military leadership. Shoigu has faced open ridicule and criticism from a section of military bloggers within Russia, especially those aligned with Prigozhin, the convict-turned-businessman-turned-leader of the Wagner Group, who enjoyed Putin’s favor.

However, when the public discord between Prigozhin and the Defense Ministry escalated into open rebellion during the summer, Putin ultimately sided with his long-serving and proven loyal Defense Minister, backing the ministry’s decision that Wagner Group fighters would need to sign contracts with the ministry.

Political analyst Kirill Shamiev told CNBC that loyalty is “a very key asset in authoritarian regimes because you develop this trust over the years. And if a person proves their loyalty in a wartime context, this becomes extremely important for an authoritarian leader.”

Prigozhin met his demise in a plane crash this summer, mere months after he led a failed insurrection against the Russian Defense Ministry in an attempt to march on Moscow.

In the aftermath of the failed rebellion, Putin appeared on television, vowing to punish “treason from within” and declaring that “unreasonable interests and personal ambition lead to treachery.”

After initially appearing to reach a deal that allowed Prigozhin and Wagner fighters to be exiled to Belarus, Prigozhin and several top Wagner leaders died in a plane crash over Russia in August.

The Kremlin has vehemently denied ordering Prigozhin’s death and stated that an investigation would take place regarding the incident. It labeled Western speculation that it orchestrated Prigozhin’s demise as “an absolute lie.”

Following the insurrection, Prigozhin reportedly pledged his loyalty to Putin during a face-to-face meeting, but analysts believe his fate was sealed when he publicly challenged the state and ultimately, Putin himself.

“I believe it served as a powerful message to the elite that Putin is firmly in control,” Sergei Medvedev noted, stating that the president “meticulously waited for these few months before executing his revenge.”

A figure like Prigozhin—perceived as an anomaly due to his close relationship with Putin yet having a casual and confrontational relationship with state institutions—will likely not be allowed to rise again, experts warn.

“I’m quite certain the Kremlin will never again allow anyone to amass the military power Prigozhin had—or the social or political influence he wielded,” Shamiev concluded.