In the late spring of 2012, Gennadios Petrov, known as the main defendant in Operation Troika against the Russian mafia in Mallorca, faced parole and pending judgments tied to alleged money laundering in Spain. He returned to Moscow on a brief leave granted by Spanish authorities, after his activities abroad. His first move upon arrival was to address Russia’s State Duma, where he served as a deputy for the ruling United Russia party. His neighbor on the island of Mallorca was also embroiled in the same case, challenging Russia’s wealthiest parliamentarian.
Petrov, unlike others, did not comply with his obligation to return to Spain. He was acquitted in 2018 of involvement with the mafia clan due to insufficient evidence connecting the funds to criminal sources. Yet the case carried far more serious and dangerous implications for the Russian state. Prosecutors described him as the leader of Tambovskaya-Malysheva, a major mafia faction based in Saint Petersburg, involved in a broad spectrum of criminal activities, including violent crimes. A criminal network that, as outlined in Vladimir Putin’s career, intersected with political power; a connection referenced in analysis by journalists and scholars alike. The relationship, described in depth by sources, showed the mafia’s reach extending into political circles during the 1990s as Putin pursued economic and strategic interests in port facilities and energy assets.
The book Putin’s Men, by British journalist Catherine Belton, discusses how organized crime and political power intertwined in Russia, arguing that high-level figures in business and governance moved in concert with criminal interests. She explains that a powerful coalition formed around energy terminals and port operations, with organized crime reacting to state moves and even threatening officials’ families. Belton speaks to EL PERIÓDICO about these dynamics, highlighting a pattern of collusion between state authorities and criminal actors in pursuit of shared gains.
In addition, Operation Troika touched many members of President Putin’s inner circle, including former classmate and current President Aleksandr Bastrykin. Bastrykin heads the Investigative Committee, the Russian equivalent of an anti-corruption prosecutor, which has pursued opposition figures such as Alexei Navalny. Moscow has indicated that the President authorized and directed investigations that were framed as attempts to discredit the Russian Army and related actions in Ukraine, with potential penalties of up to 15 years in prison.
According to the prosecution summary for the National Court, Bastrykin used his high-ranking official status to act on behalf of Petrov. The implication was that some individuals connected to the case never returned to Russia and that Bastrykin’s proximity to Putin’s inner circle hindered full scrutiny by investigators. Local resources for the investigation were reportedly constrained by those ties.
The case highlights concerns among lawyers and experts about blurred lines between the Russian state and organized crime. Many analysts in Putin’s Russia contend that mafia networks maintain privileged links with lawmakers and security officers, enabling coordination beyond ordinary channels in pursuit of shared interests.
When Spain became entangled in Operation Troika, few observers anticipated the broader consequences. The case provoked significant turmoil within the Kremlin and is linked, in some accounts, to the broader political violence and coercive actions associated with the era. CNI reports in Spain, and partners in Spanish intelligence, noted the possible connections between high-ranking Russian officials and the Russian president, and discussed the potential to relay these revelations before a judge. Observers suggested that testimonies, if given, could have placed Spain as a crucial conduit for KGB-linked money laundering activities.
Second Russian city, Putin’s baptism of corruption
Putin’s early presidency in the second Russian city during the 1990s is marked by controversial episodes. For years, Petersburg politicians and activists faced accusations, and Putin’s early career was scrutinized for practices tied to corruption amid the country’s post-Soviet turmoil. A notable public figure from that period, Marina Salye, later alleged that a program to exchange rare minerals for food caused significant losses to the city. She claimed that commissions were excessive and that minerals were sold below market value, with contracts improperly assigned.
Salye described the swap as violating the law and triggering the creation of an investigative commission. She kept documentation in a secure place and, after a tense period, withdrew from public life for a decade. She resurfaced in 2012, years before her death at age 75, sharing concerns about how political power and economic deals intertwined during a period of rapid change in Russia. The narrative around these events contributes to a broader view of governance and corruption in the country’s turbulent post-Soviet history, illustrating how private interests and state power sometimes overlapped in dramatic and lasting ways.