Why I think sanctions are likely to stay on Russia for a extended period.

Well first, Biden just called Putin a war criminal and Ukrainian officials are talking about wanting him sent to The Hague for trial. Other western leaders are being somewhat more circumspect but I think there's a growing consensus that as long as Putin remains in power and in possession of nuclear weapons he's a threat. (Side note: lots of British and American politicians cosied up with German in the 1930's. Once war came, those same politicians were among the most vociferous in condemning Germany in order to deflect any suspicion of collaboration. We're seeing the same thing now with Republicans and British Conservatives. Congressional Republicans who voted against aid for Ukraine literally a week ago are now voting for a No Fly Zone.)
For his part, Putin is doubling down on threatening "traitors and scum". Even if there's a peace agreement, he's likely to launch a massive purge of anti-war Russians and suspected traitors in his inner circle. That's going to complicate any post-war lifting of sanctions.

Next: what does any peace look like:
1. What is still probably the most likely outcome: Russia ultimately defeats the Ukrainians in the south and east and takes Kyiv or fully encircles and besieges it forcing the government to relocate to Lviv. We end up with a large part of Ukraine under Russian control and a rump Ukrainian state in about the western third of Ukraine. The almost inevitable result is a protracted and bloody insurgency in Russian-occupied Ukraine. Both the western Ukrainian state and neighboring states like Poland and Romania probably supply the rebels if only to ensure Russia is too busy bleeding to attack them next.
In this scenario, there is likely to be some sort of sanctions relief of the sort I spoke about before in relation to North Korea and pre-2003 Iraq. Limited amounts of Russian gas and oil sold with the proceeds having to go to buy stuff like medicines.
Second: some sort of face-saving deal where Ukraine declares formal neutrality recognizes Russian annexation of Crimea and Russia withdraws.
I think this is just as humiliating and destabilizing for Putin as an outright defeat and is also likely to lead to mass repression inside Russia, especially when the Russian troops return home and start telling their families and friends what they really saw and experienced.
Nor is this likely to convince western leaders Putin can be allowed to stay in power.
The third possible outcome is probably the least likely, unfortunately. Either Russia is decisively defeated militarily and forced to withdraw followed by Putin being deposed/ resigning/ committing suicide/ dying of "natural causes" or Putin is deposed etc. and then his successors decide to withdraw. Even if that happens I suspect it'll take months.

Oh and finally: Germany and the other Europeans are moving to speed up the replacement of fossil fuels with renewables and so is China.
I think that is inevitable in all three of the scenarios I outline and will be very bad news for Russia.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  Some people seem to think I'm a defender or supporter of the CPC and PRC. I'm not but 30 year of studying them have demonstrated one thing: they're depressingly durable. Countless predictions of China's imminent economic collapse have proven incorrect. But currently the Chinese economy is starting to look more and more like the Japanese economy at the start of their "lost decade" of the 1990's. Back in 1979 when the Dengist reforms started, China had a massive deficit in almost every form of physical infrastructure. Much of China's economic growth since then can be attributed to building infrastructure -ports; airports; railway lines; power plants - that increased economic efficiency. But that deficit has been largely made up and the economic returns on further investments in physical infrastructure have fallen sharply. This is why, for example, the expansion of the high speed real network has effectively been halted. Xi and the Presidium know all ...
Read more
  https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/chalmers-fantasy-of-making-a-better-capitalism-is-absurd,17189 The problem with Chalmers' essay about "value-based capitalism" is that it's a bunch of benign long term aspirations - much like Labor's talk of reforming Medicare. But just as with Medicare, the current Labor government is hamstrung by their determination to deliver massive tax cuts promised by the last government, massively increase defense spending and pursue a lower deficit despite the fact we have among the lowest budget deficits and public deft as a percentage of GDP in the developed world. Faced with reports of a radical reduction in this year's budget deficit, Chalmers response isn't relief so much as embarrassment and an insistence that no additional public spending is possible. So with Medicare we get vague talk of allowing nurses, chemists and other related professions to prescribe medications that can currently only be pre...
Read more
John Mearsheimer's lecture "Why is Ukraine the west's fault" has been getting a whole lot of attention lately mainly because of its title and because it appeals to the narcissistic and solipsistic worldview of many westerners. - it's from 2015 so it's 7 years out of date. Simply put, if you actually listen to the lecture as opposed to simply waving a link to it around in lieu of an actual argument, events since then have proven him catastrophically wrong. - Mearsheimer starts out by giving a backgrounder in which he feels the need to explain that France is next to Germany and Ukraine is next to Russia. That pretty much sets the level for the rest of the lecture. (He also completely omits Great Britain from his discussion of European geopolitics.) Oh good now he's describing the massacre of peaceful protesters in 2014 as "an overreaction" and "messy" "What they're doing is not trying to conquer Ukraine. That's not going...
Read more