I attempt here to put together a few quick thoughts following the launch of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I argue that Russia is in Ukraine to stay, and that Europe will be a theatre of competition between Russia and the US, not an actual player. I argue that autocrats love sanctions, and that China can now invade Taiwan, paralysing the US as it cannot sanction both countries. I argue that this will be a short war, with no meaningful insurgency to follow, meaning that aviation and marine activity will return to normal within less than a few weeks. I finally claim that the US will enter a period of greater instability and that now is the time to rethink liberal assumptions.
Please email me or comment to have a more detailed discussion.
Russia will remain in Ukraine indefinitely. The main argument against a long Russian occupation of Ukraine is that staying in Ukraine will be costly politically and militarily. The cost of not remaining in Ukraine, however, is higher. The cost of not remaining includes permitting weapons across the border into East Ukraine to feed an insurgency and permitting the US/NATO to use western Ukraine as a base from which to threaten Russia, which is exactly what the invasion is intended to stop. Furthermore, the sanctions for taking over Donbass and Odessa, which Russia is already attempting, are the same as for taking over the rest of Ukraine. There is no higher cost stemming from capturing all of Ukraine. It’s just that not controlling all of Ukraine means less leverage in dealing with the EU. Not controlling all of Ukraine permits Europe and the US to have a highly militarised buffer state between the EU and NATO, which is precisely what the invasion seeks to prevent. This is the big picture — Russia is there to stay. The little pictures include things like which parts of Ukraine will be annexed formally by Russia and which parts will remain under a puppet Ukrainian regime, whether to use the military against an insurgency, or to use more effective local policing, what proportion of the Russian population will join Russian troops, how many Ukrainians will be co-opted, etc...
Russia will now be on the borders of Romania, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland, as well as the Baltics, allowing it to interfere in politics in Europe much more effectively and chip away at sanctions. We are looking at a new world order. The post-World War II truce, the post-Cold War truce and the ascendancy of the West are over. In this new world order, Central and Eastern European states will look across their borders and see full Russian military formations. They will look at the US and see weakness, vacillation and mental chaos, with BLM and trans rights taking the place of serious issues. Socially conservative politicians will ask themselves, which is the better bet? Why risk their countries to side with America when America threatens to rip apart their social fabric? Why rely on America when Germany and France want to compromise with Russia? This will give Russia opportunities to develop new clients in Central and Eastern Europe, and to use them to weaken the NATO and EU consensus. With the EU threatening countries like Poland and Hungary over LGBT issues, and Russia offering discounted gas during an energy crisis, the room for division within this part of Europe will grow, favouring Russia. Russia will use this to try to weaken the wall of sanctions that is facing it, to try to weaken European unity and the capability for concerted action, and to force or entice some of the oligarchs of CEE to partner with Russian oligarchs. This makes Europe the theatre of great games, rather than a player in them.
Why autocrats love sanctions. Many analysts insisted that it made no sense for Russia to invade because of the economic cost and because of the risk of sanctions. Such analysts have been biased in the sense that they assume that the primary job of politicians is to get those GDP numbers up. Clearly, this is not how the world works or how great decisions of war and peace are made. Leaders have missions other than GDP growth. Furthermore, such analysts have shown no capacity to understand political economy. I would point out that sanctions help the targeted country root out financial interests that are tied to the West, thereby eliminating those suspected of dual loyalty. They help force the targeted country to develop native capabilities and replacement technologies, thereby strengthening the leaders’ decision making independence. They allow the regime to consolidate more fully, as the regime will always have means of evading sanctions, and can use these means to reward allies and punish enemies. This broad picture is true even if — indeed, especially if — the middle class suffers. In politics — real politics, not liberal democratic politics — the worst enemy of the regime is the middle class. They are often loud, demanding and unwilling to sacrifice for the national good. By contrast, the rich and poor are easier to control and corral. To summarise, “It’s the economy, stupid”, should refer to the political economy, not to GDP figures.
There will be no meaningful insurgency. The Russians cannot afford to lose Ukraine, unlike Afghanistan. The Ukrainian population cannot handle the level of deprivations normal to an Afghan. And Russia knows Ukraine intimately, unlike Afghanistan, and has exceptional intelligence on it. This means that Russia can snuff out any insurgency. It certainly has the right level of ruthlessness and intelligence penetration to do so. There will certainly be some sabotage and hit and run attacks, but it will not be comparable to Iraq or Afghanistan.
This will be a brief war. Russia’s military has already destroyed Ukraine’s air defences and air force. It will eliminate any artillery or armour in short order. Foreign aid, such as it is, has not been useful in dealing with Russian air superiority, and that will not change any time soon, especially with Ukrainian ports blockaded and airports destroyed. This means that naval and aerial activity will return to normal in less than a few weeks.
Russia and China will grow closer together. Taiwan is next, after which a new world order will emerge. China is a more cautious actor than Russia. But Russia and China share an objective — to develop Eurasia as a counterweight to North America. China has now seen the US humiliate itself in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has built up enormous technological and industrial capabilities. And it has a land border — safe from US fleets — with one of the world’s natural resources powerhouses. This permits China to continue to develop its economy and export markets in a manner that is far more secure and less dependent on the USA. China will buy Russian resources even more voraciously if Russia’s other export markets are restricted. China and Russia can build infrastructure at a pace that is simply not possible in Western democracies. Additionally, Xi benefits from sanctions for the same reasons listed above for Putin. A double blow by China and Russia to the world order will leave the US helpless. It cannot sanction both the world’s factory and the world’s most important natural resources producer. If it tries to do so, it will find that most countries in the world do not want to be cut off from both China and Russia. Any such attempt will weaken the US, not just Russia and China.
Political risk in the US will rise. Biden represents the last grasp of the establishment, the pinnacle of the DEI movement, the last of the neoliberals. His weakness and incompetence — high inflation, high gas prices, low international prestige, crackdowns on opposition and other assorted failures — will result in a change in 2022 and 2024. But this time, the Republicans will be vicious. They will see what Trudeau has done to his opponents, what Biden is trying to do to his opponents, and fight back more effectively. If they do that, businesses like Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Alphabet and Microsoft, along with the media that they control, will be in the crosshairs. Companies will find themselves at risk of legal action for reverse discrimination, policing of unpopular opinions, etc… These interests in the US are too powerful to not fight back, and they will. The establishment, as we saw during the Trump years, will not go gently into that good night, and the alternative has not yet clearly formed itself. This means that the US will enter another period of instability, with risks of constitutional crises, diverging and contradictory regulations, unrest, riots and so on.
A great rethink is in order. It is time to set aside the liberal distractions that have occupied the West for so long . Bad ideas like free trade, free movement, modern, infinite human rights, etc… have to go. Western leaders now need to think about autonomy — defined as having reliable food, energy and technology supply chains — social cohesion — requiring secure borders, less emphasis on individual rights, more emphasis on national duties — and political economy — requiring the nation to ensure that oligarchic class is first and foremost loyal to the people. The West can no longer afford to define political virtue in terms of GDP growth and winning elections. It is time to regain the capability for great ideas, great actions and great works. It is time to give up on liberalism’s distractions, at least if we want the West to compete in the new world order.