Putin’s last gasp?

Putin has touted Russia’s large international currency reserves and minimal public debt.

Anders Åslund

Today’s Russia poses a clear and present danger to world peace. In July, President Vladimir Putin published a long article, “About the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,” effectively denying the legitimacy of Ukraine’s existence as an independent nation-state. He also has pursued a policy of military mobilisation around Ukraine’s border, first in April and even more intensively in recent weeks. Senior Ukrainian and US officials, including President Joe Biden, are warning that Russia may launch a major ground war against Ukraine in early 2022.

Various causes of Russia’s aggressiveness have been suggested, but the most important one focuses on Russian decline, and whether this has made the country more dangerous. Is Putin genuinely intent on attacking Ukraine? If so, what should Ukraine and the West do about it?

The decline is obvious. Russia’s economy has been completely stagnant since 2014 (and mostly stagnant since 2009), and Putin has made clear that he has no interest in delivering economic growth or improved living standards. In US dollar terms, Russia’s GDP fell from $2.3 trillion in 2013 to $1.5 trillion in 2020. Since Putin first invaded Ukraine and illegally annexed Crimea in 2014, Russian households’ real (inflation-adjusted) disposable income has fallen by 10 percent.

With nothing good to say about the economy, Putin has touted Russia’s large international currency reserves and minimal public debt. These statistics appear to support his pursuit of national “greatness,” which has become synonymous with his own strongman rule.

Putin thus aspires to create a modern-day Sparta—a state focused solely on its military prowess. Since Russia’s August 2008 attack on Georgia, which revealed major military shortcomings, the Kremlin has undertaken substantial military modernisation, while much of the rest of Europe has continued its post-Cold War disarmament.

But Russia’s relative military might probably has already peaked. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Russian military expenditures reached $62 billion in 2020, a year when US military expenditures were $778 billion and China’s were $252 billion. Even India surpassed Russia with its $73 billion military budget.

Seeing the writing on the wall, Putin may now be thinking that if Russia is going to benefit from its military strength, it had better flex its muscles now, before the country’s economic foundation erodes further. Moreover, this year’s commodity price boom (particularly in energy and metals) has strengthened the Kremlin’s incentive to strike while the iron is hot.

Like a cornered animal, declining powers are often the most dangerous ones. As Graham Allison of Harvard University reminds us in Destined for War, it was a declining power, Austria-Hungary, that started World War I by declaring war on Serbia. In the current context, the Russians appear to be planning a tank and artillery campaign reminiscent of World War II; if so, their war machine is as outdated as Putin’s view of Ukraine.

A contemporary, peace-loving Western reader might wonder why Putin would want to start a war. Surely he is familiar with the legacy of Vyacheslav von Plehve, the Russian interior minister who, in 1904, famously argued that, “To avert a revolution, we need a small, victorious war!” Soon thereafter, von Plehve was assassinated by a revolutionary. Even so, the 1904-05 Russo-Japanese War ensued. That conflict was neither small nor victorious—and it ended up catalysing the revolution of 1905.

Putin is most likely focused more on his own small, successful wars in Georgia in 2008 and Crimea in 2014, which led to his highest approval ratings ever. Since then, his approval has reached new lows, and with public discontent building, he has ratcheted up political repression to a level not seen since his hero, the late Soviet leader Yuri Andropov, was in power (1982-84).

To justify his increasingly extreme repression, Putin has cranked up the Kremlin’s propaganda machinery to Soviet levels. But anti-Western messaging will not persuade the population to support him. For that, he needs another highly successful war. And because Russia stands no chance in a big war against the whole West, it needs a much more limited conflict. Hence, Putin’s choice of Ukraine, which he calls a Western vassal.

But a small, victorious war is not possible in Ukraine, either. As Ukraine’s new defense minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, recently pointed out: “The human cost for Ukraine would be catastrophic, but Ukrainians would not mourn alone. Russia would also suffer massive losses. Images of coffins returning to Russia from the front lines in Ukraine would spread like a virus across social media and would soon prove too much for even the Kremlin censors to contain. A major war in Ukraine would plunge the whole of Europe into crisis.”

US intelligence agencies warn that Russia is mobilising some 175,000 troops near its border with Ukraine. But a force of that size would not suffice. Ukraine’s active military forces comprise 250,000 troops, many with ample battle experience, who would be defending their homeland against soldiers who may have no higher aim than collecting their salaries.

Russia’s mistake in 1904 was that it did not take Japan seriously as a military power. When Japan emerged victorious, the Czar’s power was fatally weakened, allowing for the revolution that followed. A 2022 Russo-Ukrainian war could prove to be an even bigger folly, one that Putin is unlikely to survive.

In the meantime, the Kremlin must not be allowed to benefit domestically from its saber-rattling. The West responded with only limited sanctions following Putin’s previous aggression against Georgia and Ukraine. It must learn from those mistakes and stand fully with Ukraine. In addition to providing military supplies and training for Ukraine, the West should impose truly devastating sanctions against Russia. Biden and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken have promised as much. They and America’s European allies now must follow through.

—Project Syndicate

https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2021/12/09/putin-s-last-gasp

11 comments

  1. “It must learn from those mistakes and stand fully with Ukraine. In addition to providing military supplies and training for Ukraine, the West should impose truly devastating sanctions against Russia.”

    3 US presidents later, and we are still talking about what should be done if Russia invades. Russia have been invading other countries since the dwarf bastard was made president, by the drunken fool Yeltsin. It’s no secret that Putler wants to be remembered as the guy who resurrected the Soviet Union, no matter how many lives it takes. It’s well past time the West stopped this dream of Putler’s, once and for all.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Nice work by Mr. Aslund, I always feel a little better after reading his pieces.
      I keep asking myself, “Why now?!” and Mr. Aslund points to Putin’s opportunity and a confluence of events. He doesn’t say it but I say Putin has Europe (especially Germany) over a barrel and a POTUS that is weak and un-American. As the old saying goes, “When the cat is away the mice will play.”

      Liked by 3 people

        • If they would have just taken up Trump’s offer for LNG they wouldn’t have had to depend on Hitler so much. Of course the media demonized Trump enough to loosen their spines enough to become jellyfish but they made their own beds and have to sleep in them now. Just a year ago oil, gas and petrol were actually affordable.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. This is exactly what appeasement will eventually bring … war! The Western morons have not learned their lessons from the 1930s. Had they taken decisive steps early on, WWII most likely would have never happened. How many lives could have been saved back then? How many lives could this round of appeasing cost? It has already cost 14,000. This figure is small if the rodent does indeed attack Ukraine on a grand scale. Nobody in the West can be proud of their behavior but a lot to be ashamed for.

    Liked by 4 people

    • And sadly I’ve already heard some hand washing by saying, well, Ukraine isn’t in NATO so there’s no guarantees. Let’s not forget, the bus drivers and nurses that volunteered in 2014 stood up the RuSSian criminals and mercs until Iloviask and Debaltseve when the Moskali called in regular Russian troops and lied to the Ukrainians about a green corridor. Otherwise we could have gotten our border back with dentists and teachers. I think Putin will be surprised by our resolve this time.

      Liked by 4 people

      • When you look at the figures, the appeasement by these Western countries is staggering. GDP of the US, $21 trillion, GDP of the EU $15 trillion, GDP of the UK, $2.1 trillion. GDP of Muscovy, $1.4 trillion. That’s $38 trillion against $1.4 trillion.

        Liked by 3 people

      • The sad part is that the Budapest signatories are hiding behind the unfirtunate fact that Ukraine is not a NATO member. They have completely forgotten the memorandum that they signed. They have betrayed Ukraine from day one.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Absolutely, and to support your statement it might be necessary to remind everyone what Budapest was supposed to “guarantee”. You will see every single point Putin has violated and virtually not even reported.

          1. Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
          2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
          3. Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to influence their politics.
          4. Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.
          5. Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
          6. Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments.

          Liked by 3 people

          • The signatories have gladly ignored every offense that mafia land committed. As I’ve said before, there will probably never be another country on this planet that will volunteer to surrender its nuclear weapons after Ukraine was thrown under a bus by the BM.

            Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.