Hit the like button at the top or bottom of the page to like this entry. Use the share and/or re-stack buttons to share this across social media. Leave a comment if the mood strikes you to do so.
This ends the two part series on a subject that many of you have asked me to write about, in order to see where I stand on this conflict in its current phase.
I hope you enjoy it! Lots of research and effort went into this two-parter.
And please do me the favour of spreading this series around. Send it to everyone who you think might enjoy it.
I'll spread it, because its well written, but you're list of wins for America seems off in *some* big ways:
I'm skeptical of point 2, also, the US National Center typically likes high ag prices globally, the best chance here is a Ukrainian rump state floods international markets with cheap grain because their domestic costs have basemented.
Re point 6, very little of that actually seems to be happening, most of what is moving outside its respective country os going to places other than the US, some of which, like Serbia, aren;t even guaranteed to stay in the US's orbit, lot of the manufacturing thats shutting down in Germany isnt moving, its just shutting down.
In regards to "no American losses of life, over 100,000 Russians dead", many of those weren't Russian army soldiers, and more importantly this war has revitalized the Russian army's skills, organizational abilities, meritocracy in the officer and nco corps, and their industrial base, so this has had the opposite effect, its made Russia militarily stronger
I'm not sure what's left of Ukraine will be out of Russia's orbit, because it may end up being a *Slavic* crime/corruption ridden military/mafia state, that's terrain Russia knows how to manipulate quite well lol
The rest of your points are well thought and valid but they they won't mean anything because of the shock coming to the American National Center, a shock that will come quicker and be stronger due to the consequences of what they've done here.
Actually I just had a thought and I'll self correct on my response to your point 2, it *MAY* be the case that the ANC would like UKR super cheap grain to flood EU markets as part of enabling the takeover of the farms (and thus diminish of the farmer's potential of political force) by Big Time Investor Big AG.
“Moscow is also importing arms from North Korea and Iran and has access to consumer items that contain technology that it can repurpose for military uses.”
Are you (your source) referring to the repurposing of advanced microchips? If so I’m all ears for more detail if available.
Ukraine is the biggest loser but higher energy prices for Europe are not going away. German industrial production has declined 7 months in a row. It is hard to disaggregate all the factors hurting economy growth. It could be terrible public policy, the decline of the combustion auto industry, weakness in trade partners, but Olaf Scholz is toast because his economy is in the crapper. And as Germany goes, so does Europe. That has been the thinking since the rebuilding of West Germany after World War 2. So it is possible we will have two big losers, and two winners.
I keep wondering how long it can go. De-industrialization seems like a long term project, so what we are seeing now is just the beginning (it takes time to relocate major industrial plants after all). The fact that so much has happened so quickly is a big deal. I do wonder if EV cars are somewhat a fad, boosted by public policy that cannot prevail in the face of economic decline. On top of high energy prices can Europe really afford to revitalize it's military size and capacity like it appears it is trying to do?
Arms industry is another open question. The West has problems manufacturing military gear at quantity without massive overruns. Maybe they solve it, but there is no evidence for that, two years into the Ukraine war.
In terms of economics, Germany is much more heavy manufacturing dependent. That manufacturing is in autos, chemicals, electrical equipment - BMW, BASF, and Siemens. Higher energy prices is a huge issue. They can't produce chemicals at competitive cost if they pay huge premiums versus US and China on natural gas. Germany won't implode, but European economic growth will be dragged down.
Maybe not implode but it's not like European economic growth was that impressive before this conflict. I keep seeing people point out that the EU used to have parity with the US in terms of economic power and that has only eroded over time. This will only accelerate.
Very nicely written. Two random comments that came to mind in my reading that I would love some insights on:
1. I still don't see how this ends. There is no trust anymore. Also with Russia's war production outpacing everyone else will they decide to just continue? This would only make sense if war really broke out in the Middle east and the US really does get over stretched (and throw in some big deal happening in Taiwan for good measure).
2. I still struggle to see this as a big win for the US, at least long term. Short term everything you have said is true. Everything depends on how much the south can unify and create true multipolar world. But it seems to me a true multipolar world, which many observers think is coming, would be a loss for the US overall. The US seems to be at it's strongest and weakest point in my lifetime (all post cold war). It has bases everywhere and influence with it, but I've never been less impressed with the leadership and I don't see that improving anytime soon (and there is that curious case of record high debt which may or may not matter for all I can tell).
I think we should never underestimate the Russian urge to not go all-out for the total win. If this happens, then we'll see a frozen conflict east of the Dnieper river.
Just a thought regarding your view of USA being a big winner. I follow the logic but could this be a pyhrric victory?
In the greater game, might not Taiwan be looking on aghast at the USA actions and having second thoughts on whether they want to be placed in the position of being Sacrificial Lamb v 2.0 ?
Allow me however to question the assessment of winners and losers.
When assessing outcomes in economics but also in politics, it s important to ask oneself what is the baseline. Is Russia a winner against a baseline in which Ukraine would have been integrated in NATO in its pre-war borders? Even at the cost of turning the Baltic into a NATO lake, losing grip on other parts of its hinterland, and becoming an economic dependency of China? If Russia is a small winner against the baseline of Ukraine being integrated into NATO, how is the US a big winner against the same baseline? Or do the gains for the US rather stem from the reassertion of its hegemony in Europe? If so, however, would not an inward turn of the US under a new Trump administration mean throwing away such gains?
Perhaps because my background is more in economics than in politics I find that economics is given too little attention in your analysis. Russia may have weathered economic sanctions better than expected, but its economic trajectory is likely to be worse under the current scenario than the any baseline I can think of. The losses of manpower in the war are compounded by those of qualified workers leaving the country (itself a telltale sign of the economic prospects of the country), the loss of the European markets for its resource-based economy and the sealing off from the technological frontier. Moreover, a larger share of a smaller economy will have to be devoted to military instead of civilian expenditure. In economic terms at least, Russia seems to be a loser, possibly even relative to Ukraine in its current borders, if this integrates into the European economy. Are the benefits of keeping Ukraine out of NATO and adding a few provinces (likely to indefinitely burden the budget) to Russia worth all these economic costs?
Thank you for your thoughts but I think you are still very incorrect in your analysis. The US has won in the sense of making the EU more dependant on it for......... about everything. But the weakness of the US in terms of manufacturing has been exposed. (the inability to make enough shells) Our expensive weapons have been shown to be no better than the Russians. The Russian military is now much larger and more powerful than it was before. We have strengthened the alliance of China and Russia. The rest of the world, except for Europe and the Anglosphere, is more and more in support of a multipolar world. The US and its allies are now becoming somewhat isolated. The "rest of the world" (which to Washington means Europe and Australia and Canada) is beginning to see the limits of the US empire. The dollar has lost some of its power and this will continue to slide. The failure of sanctions is very telling. And, really, did you have to mention the absurd trope about using chips from consumer products? (the old washing machine to missile story). No, I am afraid the US is the big loser here. Russia is much more than a gas station with nuclear weapons. Now everybody knows that----except the West with its maniacal Russophobic, jingoistic press corps.
I'm in manufacturing. We are reshoring manufacturing because after 30 years of bean-counter-driven folly, manufacturers themselves are realizing offshoring had significant disadvantages. This began long before the war in Ukraine. It will accelerate only to the extent lawyers and financial people are finally jettisoned from C suites.
I think you massively underestimate the Russian desire to make trouble in Europe and overseas. They don’t want or need to invade Poland or Finland but they will use their resources to facilitate, create and exacerbate instability in Europe and the West. Russia poisoned Russians in the UK. No need for a military intervention.
An outstanding analysis...unsentimental, contrarian and focused on fact.
Turbo America gambled big and will leave the table with substantial gains at the expense of Europe (above all the collapse of EU dreams of strategic autonomy and enhanced EU dependency on American natural gas).
But it remains to be seen how this plays out in Western, South and East Asia. There is no shortage in shrewdness across Asia. Governments there can see for themselves how the US has behaved towards Ukraine and the EU. They will draw their own conclusions about the reliability of the US as an ally and as an arms supplier.
It also remains to be seen what fall-out occurs within the US itself. The US Deep State's obsession with Putin, Russiagate and the many links between Washington and Kiev guarantee further complications. The US will open its doors to its fifth column in Ukraine which includes people with backgrounds in policing, security and the military all of whom will be available for suitable employment in their new homes. Given the existing potential for enhanced repression within the continental US this is unlikely to end well.
Hmmm, I'm pretty sure the American National Center has made a gigantic error in initiating this misadventure, future historians may look back on it in the view that its one of the greatest errors ever committed, by anyone. But thats a longo convo.
No way that a gentleman-adventurer puts a foot wrong on something like this. One or other faction of the powers that be wants Tucker in Moscow. Presumably they, whoever they are, would be on nodding terms with whoever ensured that Snowden did not end up in a supermax.
It can't be too much longer before the regime loyalists a rung or two down from Obama and Hilary decide that their bosses are not worth the risk. Then things get Julio-Claudian very quickly.
Trump largely irrelevant. He simply gets to entertain/outrage...he is no player. His refusal to protect his followers makes him a valuable 'opposition' leader.
Elections are fetishes for incels. Political loyalties are exactly like the parasocial relationships that creeps have with life size sex dolls. The imagination is everything.
"The only threat to it that I can envision is the following: a complete collapse of the UAF that allows the Russians to seize Kiev and move across the Dnieper towards Vinnitsa and Zhitomyr. This would change my calculus, as such a chain of events would result in not just an overwhelming Russian strategic military victory, but would also negatively impact the USA’s standing globally, because such a catastrophe would be viewed as the USA being an unreliable ally (more than it is at present), shaking NATO to its very core."
This outcome is far more likely than you give credit. There's little question the Russians can achieve it if they want and from what they've been saying -- and the reality that if they don't take Kiev/Odessa and at least up to the Dniepr they will surely be fighting a new Ukrainian army within 5 years -- it will happen once they are ready to move forward which could be as soon as this coming summer. I predict Russia can live with nothing less than total capitulation and capture of Ukraine with the exception of the far western regions, which will likely be absorbed by Poland, Romania, etc. once Russia completes its objectives. This will be a total disaster for the US and once and for all put to bed the notion that NATO is anything but a fake and impotent force.
I've been wrong before but I think this time such an outcome is inevitable.
Putin can wait for DC to finish dissolving. It’s happening already.
The real question for him and all concerned; there is no replacement in sight.
Certainly not the hapless GOP governors. If these wretched creatures had any brains or balls they’d already be organizing for DC disconnected and with it…
… the money.
If one thinks the European Satrap Regional Managers of the American Empire unimpressive, they are giants compared to the American State governors.
Not 12 of these state governments could withstand Le Deluge that follows the realization that no one is left in DC to give them orders and send them money.
I wonder what the fate of professional beggars is when actual famine hits? That would be history’s only guide to the fate of the Domestic Satraps.
How to avoid elderly pensioners crisis; send them to the Russian Front. Average age 43.
“Under the new law, the minimum conscription age will be lowered to 25, from 27. Summonses will be sent online and distributed in person. All new recruits will be trained for two to three months, while those aged 18 to 24 will be obliged to undergo five months of military training.” - Spectator UK
Hit the like button at the top or bottom of the page to like this entry. Use the share and/or re-stack buttons to share this across social media. Leave a comment if the mood strikes you to do so.
This ends the two part series on a subject that many of you have asked me to write about, in order to see where I stand on this conflict in its current phase.
I hope you enjoy it! Lots of research and effort went into this two-parter.
And please do me the favour of spreading this series around. Send it to everyone who you think might enjoy it.
I'll spread it, because its well written, but you're list of wins for America seems off in *some* big ways:
I'm skeptical of point 2, also, the US National Center typically likes high ag prices globally, the best chance here is a Ukrainian rump state floods international markets with cheap grain because their domestic costs have basemented.
Re point 6, very little of that actually seems to be happening, most of what is moving outside its respective country os going to places other than the US, some of which, like Serbia, aren;t even guaranteed to stay in the US's orbit, lot of the manufacturing thats shutting down in Germany isnt moving, its just shutting down.
In regards to "no American losses of life, over 100,000 Russians dead", many of those weren't Russian army soldiers, and more importantly this war has revitalized the Russian army's skills, organizational abilities, meritocracy in the officer and nco corps, and their industrial base, so this has had the opposite effect, its made Russia militarily stronger
I'm not sure what's left of Ukraine will be out of Russia's orbit, because it may end up being a *Slavic* crime/corruption ridden military/mafia state, that's terrain Russia knows how to manipulate quite well lol
The rest of your points are well thought and valid but they they won't mean anything because of the shock coming to the American National Center, a shock that will come quicker and be stronger due to the consequences of what they've done here.
Thanks for competent writing,
have a nice day. ---Mike
Thanks for the thoughtful post and glad you enjoyed the essay.
Actually I just had a thought and I'll self correct on my response to your point 2, it *MAY* be the case that the ANC would like UKR super cheap grain to flood EU markets as part of enabling the takeover of the farms (and thus diminish of the farmer's potential of political force) by Big Time Investor Big AG.
Hmmm, I dunno... maybe.
I hope your having a good afternoon. ---Mike
"The purpose of a system is what it does" and 100K++ dead Ukranians (likely) leads one to thinking in some dark places.
"but Ukraine faces a funding shortfall of 40 Million USD this year alone!"
Billion?
ah fuck, yes...will edit now
edited
Great synopsis, thank you.
“Moscow is also importing arms from North Korea and Iran and has access to consumer items that contain technology that it can repurpose for military uses.”
Are you (your source) referring to the repurposing of advanced microchips? If so I’m all ears for more detail if available.
Ukraine is the biggest loser but higher energy prices for Europe are not going away. German industrial production has declined 7 months in a row. It is hard to disaggregate all the factors hurting economy growth. It could be terrible public policy, the decline of the combustion auto industry, weakness in trade partners, but Olaf Scholz is toast because his economy is in the crapper. And as Germany goes, so does Europe. That has been the thinking since the rebuilding of West Germany after World War 2. So it is possible we will have two big losers, and two winners.
I keep wondering how long it can go. De-industrialization seems like a long term project, so what we are seeing now is just the beginning (it takes time to relocate major industrial plants after all). The fact that so much has happened so quickly is a big deal. I do wonder if EV cars are somewhat a fad, boosted by public policy that cannot prevail in the face of economic decline. On top of high energy prices can Europe really afford to revitalize it's military size and capacity like it appears it is trying to do?
Arms industry is another open question. The West has problems manufacturing military gear at quantity without massive overruns. Maybe they solve it, but there is no evidence for that, two years into the Ukraine war.
In terms of economics, Germany is much more heavy manufacturing dependent. That manufacturing is in autos, chemicals, electrical equipment - BMW, BASF, and Siemens. Higher energy prices is a huge issue. They can't produce chemicals at competitive cost if they pay huge premiums versus US and China on natural gas. Germany won't implode, but European economic growth will be dragged down.
Maybe not implode but it's not like European economic growth was that impressive before this conflict. I keep seeing people point out that the EU used to have parity with the US in terms of economic power and that has only eroded over time. This will only accelerate.
CTE: chronic traumatic encephalopathy?
Very nicely written. Two random comments that came to mind in my reading that I would love some insights on:
1. I still don't see how this ends. There is no trust anymore. Also with Russia's war production outpacing everyone else will they decide to just continue? This would only make sense if war really broke out in the Middle east and the US really does get over stretched (and throw in some big deal happening in Taiwan for good measure).
2. I still struggle to see this as a big win for the US, at least long term. Short term everything you have said is true. Everything depends on how much the south can unify and create true multipolar world. But it seems to me a true multipolar world, which many observers think is coming, would be a loss for the US overall. The US seems to be at it's strongest and weakest point in my lifetime (all post cold war). It has bases everywhere and influence with it, but I've never been less impressed with the leadership and I don't see that improving anytime soon (and there is that curious case of record high debt which may or may not matter for all I can tell).
I think we should never underestimate the Russian urge to not go all-out for the total win. If this happens, then we'll see a frozen conflict east of the Dnieper river.
west of the Dnepr river
Very good.
Just a thought regarding your view of USA being a big winner. I follow the logic but could this be a pyhrric victory?
In the greater game, might not Taiwan be looking on aghast at the USA actions and having second thoughts on whether they want to be placed in the position of being Sacrificial Lamb v 2.0 ?
Taiwanese politics and recent election results do not suggest that at present. But who knows?
A comprehensive and perceptive analysis.
Allow me however to question the assessment of winners and losers.
When assessing outcomes in economics but also in politics, it s important to ask oneself what is the baseline. Is Russia a winner against a baseline in which Ukraine would have been integrated in NATO in its pre-war borders? Even at the cost of turning the Baltic into a NATO lake, losing grip on other parts of its hinterland, and becoming an economic dependency of China? If Russia is a small winner against the baseline of Ukraine being integrated into NATO, how is the US a big winner against the same baseline? Or do the gains for the US rather stem from the reassertion of its hegemony in Europe? If so, however, would not an inward turn of the US under a new Trump administration mean throwing away such gains?
Perhaps because my background is more in economics than in politics I find that economics is given too little attention in your analysis. Russia may have weathered economic sanctions better than expected, but its economic trajectory is likely to be worse under the current scenario than the any baseline I can think of. The losses of manpower in the war are compounded by those of qualified workers leaving the country (itself a telltale sign of the economic prospects of the country), the loss of the European markets for its resource-based economy and the sealing off from the technological frontier. Moreover, a larger share of a smaller economy will have to be devoted to military instead of civilian expenditure. In economic terms at least, Russia seems to be a loser, possibly even relative to Ukraine in its current borders, if this integrates into the European economy. Are the benefits of keeping Ukraine out of NATO and adding a few provinces (likely to indefinitely burden the budget) to Russia worth all these economic costs?
Good questions. I think that the calculus made in Moscow is that it is all worth it in the long run.
Thank you for your thoughts but I think you are still very incorrect in your analysis. The US has won in the sense of making the EU more dependant on it for......... about everything. But the weakness of the US in terms of manufacturing has been exposed. (the inability to make enough shells) Our expensive weapons have been shown to be no better than the Russians. The Russian military is now much larger and more powerful than it was before. We have strengthened the alliance of China and Russia. The rest of the world, except for Europe and the Anglosphere, is more and more in support of a multipolar world. The US and its allies are now becoming somewhat isolated. The "rest of the world" (which to Washington means Europe and Australia and Canada) is beginning to see the limits of the US empire. The dollar has lost some of its power and this will continue to slide. The failure of sanctions is very telling. And, really, did you have to mention the absurd trope about using chips from consumer products? (the old washing machine to missile story). No, I am afraid the US is the big loser here. Russia is much more than a gas station with nuclear weapons. Now everybody knows that----except the West with its maniacal Russophobic, jingoistic press corps.
"the absurd trope about using chips from consumer products? (the old washing machine to missile story)."
Not "washing machines"... Nvidia GPUs (advanced graphics cards -- actually, for a long time now consumer-level) are what power many supercomputers.
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/record-gpu-accelerated-supercomputers-top500/
We 🇺🇸 are reshoring industry at a very rapid clip.
It’s not instant, we have to reverse 3 decades of folly.
- I don’t support the Ukraine war, btw.
I'm in manufacturing. We are reshoring manufacturing because after 30 years of bean-counter-driven folly, manufacturers themselves are realizing offshoring had significant disadvantages. This began long before the war in Ukraine. It will accelerate only to the extent lawyers and financial people are finally jettisoned from C suites.
Agree completely and am totally supportive. I have banged this same drum for years.
We carry this outstanding Reshoring Initiative-
https://reshorenow.org/
And these guys 6 times a month, Manufacturing Talk Radio and their ISM reports.
https://jacketmediaco.com/podcasts/manufacturing-talk-radio/
What will Russia do with this new army of theirs? Attack Poland or Finland? I strongly doubt it.
I think you massively underestimate the Russian desire to make trouble in Europe and overseas. They don’t want or need to invade Poland or Finland but they will use their resources to facilitate, create and exacerbate instability in Europe and the West. Russia poisoned Russians in the UK. No need for a military intervention.
So far Tucker is wishing he scripted the Interview…
An outstanding analysis...unsentimental, contrarian and focused on fact.
Turbo America gambled big and will leave the table with substantial gains at the expense of Europe (above all the collapse of EU dreams of strategic autonomy and enhanced EU dependency on American natural gas).
But it remains to be seen how this plays out in Western, South and East Asia. There is no shortage in shrewdness across Asia. Governments there can see for themselves how the US has behaved towards Ukraine and the EU. They will draw their own conclusions about the reliability of the US as an ally and as an arms supplier.
It also remains to be seen what fall-out occurs within the US itself. The US Deep State's obsession with Putin, Russiagate and the many links between Washington and Kiev guarantee further complications. The US will open its doors to its fifth column in Ukraine which includes people with backgrounds in policing, security and the military all of whom will be available for suitable employment in their new homes. Given the existing potential for enhanced repression within the continental US this is unlikely to end well.
It’s rather less repression directly than indirect repression by lawlessness ...
.... and criminal elements that begin to appear as state or elite partners.
There’s great opportunity for the weakened but organized and well financed state elements in chaos. War takes money.
Its not motivation, it’s survival, supply, resources.
100 times this.
Hmmm, I'm pretty sure the American National Center has made a gigantic error in initiating this misadventure, future historians may look back on it in the view that its one of the greatest errors ever committed, by anyone. But thats a longo convo.
Have a good one,
---Mike
Zaluzhny gone.
You should do a post on the Tucker and Putin interview.
Putin turned down releasing a journalist held by Russia.
However not for nothing...
... matter being discussed between special services.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/08/business/media/tucker-carlson-putin-evan-gershkovich.html
BTW Tucker would be in jail or on his way without backing, unlike say Peter Navarro ... Trump can’t and doesn’t protect his people.
No way that a gentleman-adventurer puts a foot wrong on something like this. One or other faction of the powers that be wants Tucker in Moscow. Presumably they, whoever they are, would be on nodding terms with whoever ensured that Snowden did not end up in a supermax.
It can't be too much longer before the regime loyalists a rung or two down from Obama and Hilary decide that their bosses are not worth the risk. Then things get Julio-Claudian very quickly.
Trump largely irrelevant. He simply gets to entertain/outrage...he is no player. His refusal to protect his followers makes him a valuable 'opposition' leader.
Trump sadly is leading the “opposition.” Really, they must have their elections for they think it agency.
Elections are to power what pornography is to sex. Democracy makes incels of us all.
Stolen!
All the best insights deserve to be stolen.
Elections are power, like most power in DC illusory.
Elections are fetishes for incels. Political loyalties are exactly like the parasocial relationships that creeps have with life size sex dolls. The imagination is everything.
"The only threat to it that I can envision is the following: a complete collapse of the UAF that allows the Russians to seize Kiev and move across the Dnieper towards Vinnitsa and Zhitomyr. This would change my calculus, as such a chain of events would result in not just an overwhelming Russian strategic military victory, but would also negatively impact the USA’s standing globally, because such a catastrophe would be viewed as the USA being an unreliable ally (more than it is at present), shaking NATO to its very core."
This outcome is far more likely than you give credit. There's little question the Russians can achieve it if they want and from what they've been saying -- and the reality that if they don't take Kiev/Odessa and at least up to the Dniepr they will surely be fighting a new Ukrainian army within 5 years -- it will happen once they are ready to move forward which could be as soon as this coming summer. I predict Russia can live with nothing less than total capitulation and capture of Ukraine with the exception of the far western regions, which will likely be absorbed by Poland, Romania, etc. once Russia completes its objectives. This will be a total disaster for the US and once and for all put to bed the notion that NATO is anything but a fake and impotent force.
I've been wrong before but I think this time such an outcome is inevitable.
Putin said as much, he can’t live with a “Nazi” supporting regime in Kiev.
I do not discount the possibility, which is why I raised it. But we're gonna have to wait and see.
Putin can wait for DC to finish dissolving. It’s happening already.
The real question for him and all concerned; there is no replacement in sight.
Certainly not the hapless GOP governors. If these wretched creatures had any brains or balls they’d already be organizing for DC disconnected and with it…
… the money.
If one thinks the European Satrap Regional Managers of the American Empire unimpressive, they are giants compared to the American State governors.
Not 12 of these state governments could withstand Le Deluge that follows the realization that no one is left in DC to give them orders and send them money.
I wonder what the fate of professional beggars is when actual famine hits? That would be history’s only guide to the fate of the Domestic Satraps.
Apres Sam, Le Deluge
How to avoid elderly pensioners crisis; send them to the Russian Front. Average age 43.
“Under the new law, the minimum conscription age will be lowered to 25, from 27. Summonses will be sent online and distributed in person. All new recruits will be trained for two to three months, while those aged 18 to 24 will be obliged to undergo five months of military training.” - Spectator UK
That’s saving the young for the “comeback.”