Putin’s Folly and the End of Cold Wars

Posted on by

First, if you missed The war in Ukraine isn’t working out the way Russia intended in the Washington Post, from yesterday’s blog post, be sure to take a look. And then follow that up with Fred Kaplan at Slate.

Michael Kofman, a military analyst at CNA, an Arlington, Virginia–based think tank, who has been following the battle closely, tweeted late Sunday afternoon, “It’s taken me a while to figure out what [the Russian military is] trying to do, because it looks so ridiculous and incompetent.” B.A. Friedman, a military historian and tactician, went further: “This isn’t a good army executing a bad plan. It isn’t a good army executing outdated or out-of-context tactics. It’s a bad army!”

Then Kapan goes on for a few paragraphs about all the military mistakes the Russians made going into Ukraine. The word “amateurish” comes to mind. Do take a look.

There is a larger factor here: The Russian army is composed, by and large, of one-year conscripts, who are poorly trained (even within the confines of Russian military training), badly treated, and uninspired by ideology or any other motivating spirit. Hence the stories of captured Russian troops who had no idea why they were in Ukraine. At least a few didn’t even know that they were in Ukraine—they thought they were still doing exercises in Belarus. Others have reportedly been found knocking on village doors for food or, in one case, asking a local police station for fuel.

The Russian army is not trained to improvise if the plan worked out at headquarters falls apart. “In politics and in warfare, the small elite on top doesn’t want subordinates to get too creative—if they did, they might take over,” Kaplan writes. If Step 2 doesn’t work,  the Russians will still go on to Step 3, because that’s all they know. “Therefore, large troop-transport planes tried to land, even though the airport hadn’t been completely secured and Ukrainian air defense systems hadn’t been destroyed. As a result, two Il-76 transport planes, each carrying 100 airborne troops, were shot down.”

You’ve probably heard about the massive Russian convoy slowly lumbering toward Kyiv. We’ve all seen the satellite images. The tanks and other military vehicles are not being escorted by infantry, and I understand there are no combat planes above, protecting them. If it weren’t such a one-sided war, I imagine those tanks would have been bombed to oblivion already. Were it not for nukes, I’m sure somebody else’s bombers would have taken care of it. Unfortunately, the convoy is still moving as I write this.

Speaking of planes, see The Mysterious Case of the Missing Russian Air Force. I don’t know anything about this site or the author, but it does describe a puzzling lack of coordination on the Russians’ part.

This is not to say that the Russians are going to lose, because they still have overwhelming advantages over the Ukrainians. And the Russian troops are about to be reinforced by troops from Belarus and Chechnya, I understand. But it does suggest that the Russian military isn’t as formidible as it was cracked up to be. Putin’s move into Ukraine revealed a huge weakness.

Looking at Russia from another angle — Paul Krugman is calling Russia a “Potemkin Superpower.”

Before Putin invaded Ukraine, I might have described the Russian Federation as a medium-size power punching above its weight in part by exploiting Western divisions and corruption, in part by maintaining a powerful military. Since then, however, two things have become clear. First, Putin has delusions of grandeur. Second, Russia is even weaker than most people, myself included, seem to have realized.

First, Krugman says, Russia’s economy is so small — a little more than half the size of either Britain’s or France’s — it seems remarkable that it could support a world-class military. And, in fact — maybe it couldn’t.

Further, Russia’s standard of living “is sustained by large imports of manufactured goods, mostly paid for via exports of oil and natural gas,” Krugman writes. This left it vulnerable to sanctions that might disrupt trade.

Before the invasion it was common to talk about how Putin had created “fortress Russia,” an economy immune to economic sanctions, by accumulating a huge war chest of foreign currency reserves. Now, however, such talk seems naïve. What, after all, are foreign reserves? They aren’t bags of cash. For the most part they consist of deposits in overseas banks and holdings of other governments’ debt — that is, assets that can be frozen if most of the world is united in revulsion against a rogue government’s military aggression.

I googled for the current value of the ruble, and got this —

I got this from an economist friend today — this is the chart of a Russian bank listed on the London stock exchange.

This is a new thing. We’ve never seen so much of the world rise up to impose such crippling sanctions on a rogue nation before. This could change the entire calculus of warfare. Perhaps the U.S. doesn’t need to be spending so much on being prepared to fight World War II again. Or, as long as we don’t plan to invade anybody, I suppose.

Back to Krugman —

But Europe mainly burns gas for heat; gas consumption is 2.5 times higher in the winter than it is in the summer. Well, winter will soon be over — and the European Union has time to prepare for another winter without Russian gas if it’s willing to make some hard choices.

Of course, gas is going up here, too. The Right is going overboard blaming Biden for our dependence on foreign oil, when they (and some centrist Democrats) are the ones who have blocked investment in alternative energies all these years. If we’d gotten started on weaning ourselves from fossil fuels back when people first started talking about it, the price of gas wouldn’t be an issue now, would it?

See also The Intercept, Saudi-Russian collusion is driving up gas prices. If the sanctions succeed in destroying Putin, send a note to Mohammed bin Salman — “You’re next.”

I keep reading that we’re on the brink of a new Cold War, but I don’t think so. I could be wrong, but what I’m seeing may just be the last gasp of the old Cold War and the beginning of a time in which the world’s democracies rely on other kinds of power to keep the despots in check. Let’s hope so.

Update: See In just 72 hours, Europe overhauled its entire post-Cold War relationship with Russia 

16 thoughts on “Putin’s Folly and the End of Cold Wars”

  1. <i>First, if you missed The war in Ukraine isn’t working out the way Russia intended in the Washington Post, from yesterday’s blog post,</i>

    Is this the same same Washington Post that told people about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass distruction? 

     

    Yup, of course I trust them.

    <a href="https://gcaptain.com/russia-worlds-most-powerful-nuclear-powered-icebreaker-headed-to-arctic/"&gt; Russia: World’s Most Powerful Nuclear-Powered Icebreaker Headed to Arctic</a>

    Damn rowboat!

    1

    • Allow me to give you a lesson on evaluating a media story.

      1) Read the story.  It does not look like you did – you simply dissed the story by disagreeing with some previous coverage. (My personal reaction is contempt for anyone who will comment on what they did not bother to read. If you are too lazy to read it, STFU.)

      2) Objectively, evaluate the statements of fact – IN THE STORY UNDER EXAMINATION! Previous coverage by that source does not prove or disprove that this story is accurate. Cross-check the facts if you can. (This also requires some effort and skill with Google.)

      3) Look for what's missing. Is the story deliberately misleading, though technically factual, by leaving out crucial evidence? (You either have to be well-read or make an effort to learn.) 

      The Washington Post almost singlehandedly brought down the Nixon administration. Which proves nothing about THIS article. The argument you made to refute the article Maha cited shows zero critical thinking skills.

      4

      • @ doug

        <i>Allow me to give you a lesson on evaluating a media story.</i>

        Most kind of you. 

        The Washington Post seems very good in news within  the USA  as far as I can tell. 

        To believe anything in international news  in it or the New York Times requires me to imitate Alice in Wonderland and believe anything I was told three times is true. 

        I am not from the USA and  have lived or travelled in a number of countries. I evaluate the US  news reports against other, non-US, sources and, occasionally,  personal experience. I have arrived at the conclusion fiction writers would often be more accurate though the New York Times is usually worse.

         

         

    • I'm with Doug on this. Yes, twenty years ago the Bush Administration pretty much snookered U.S. news media wholesale over Iraq, but at least some of them have learned lessons from that. The New York Times was a worse tool than the Washington Post, note. And fifty years ago it was WaPo that blew the lid off the Nixon Administration. Things change. It's kind of inane to call out 20-year-old reporting as a reason to not read reporting in it now. 

      4

  2. Barbara, like you, I think that this murderous attempt to fuse Ukraine into Russia is Putin's last grasp at historical greatness, and as such, is the last gasp of the old Cold War.

    Even before Putin made his first attack, I wondered why now, and not over the last 5 years?

    I think I know now.

    With tRUMP trying to break-up NATO, Putin felt comfortable.  He knew tRUMP, being an imbecile with a flunky's heart, would follow whatever Vlad told him. 

    Helsinki was the proof to Pooty-poot that tRUMP was with him.  And so, he waited, hoping tRUMP would get another 4 years. (Kudos to our cyber people who, unlike in 2016 when they weren't prepared,  managed to keep Russia's interference way down!  And remember:  This was when tRUMP was POTUS!  Those cyber folks have gutsl).

    But Putin wasn't as lucky as he was in 2016, and Biden, the anti-tRUMP, became POTUS.

    Biden immediately started mending damaged international relations as soon as he was in the Oval Office.  

    Biden was able to heal our relationships(s) with the countries in NATO, and with NATO as a whole.  Biden was also able to repair tRUMP's other international fuster-cucks.  Even, to a degree, with China.

    Putin, seeing NATO rise back up, and possibly be reinvigorated to its committment to the original mission, panicked.  

    He started the build-up, then went over to Xi in China to let him know what he was planning.  And also, and more importantly, getting a non-involvement pact – no military or economic interference from China.

    Another reason I wondered, was why Putin waited until the end of February to attack?

    I think Putin gave his word to Xi to not attack during China's Winter Olympics.

    This was also remarkably stupid, because when Spring hits Ukraine, the country is a massive mudpit.  You can offroad on a tank in any conditions – except for mud.  Tanks sink into that mud, which immobilizes said weapons, and makes them really big targets for partisans.  That 40+ mile-long line of Russian sitting-ducks can't stray from that road onto the fields because of mud.

    Spring, with our ever warming globe, comes earlier and earlier every year.  Winter saved Russia from Hitler.  But it was retreating during Spring that really helped destroy Hitler's military.  And during their retreat, Napoleon's military left everything they had on the sides of the roads, in order to get home to France faster.

    Putin should have attacked right around the new year.

    Poor Ukraine.  But that's for now.  Putin's Ukraine War will be a Pyrrhic Victory at best for him.  At worst for Vlad, this war will tear Russia apart, and hopefully, will end the rule of this psychopathic gangster!  Even in "victory," Putin and his occupiers will have to worry about partisans every second if every day.

    If we don't all die in a nuclear war in the near future, I think Ukraine will rise from Putin's attack, stronger.  This will take decades.  Maybe I'm dreaming…

    BTW:  If there was any doubt in anyone's mind over whether Ukraine was always a part of Russia, or not, I think today's Ukes exposed that lie.  Another hint?   You don't usually have two languages for (theoretically) one country.  Ukraine has often been under the Russian thumb.  But Ukraine never liked being under Russian control.

     The Ukrainian National Anthem, says it all about that resilient nation:  "Shchene vmerla Ukraina." (Ukraine is not dead yet!)

    3

  3. Let’s talk about a Russian article from the future…

    You may have missed it, but Russia briefly released a triumphant news release shortly after the invasion got started. It was composed before the invasion began, and was robotically released according to some schedule that obviously didn’t work out. It quickly got pulled, but not before it was archived and the public got a glimpse.

    The important thing, is that in it Putin sets aside whatever phony pretext he gave for invasion, and lays out what he’s really after.

    1

  4. Some Russian troops are surrendering or sabotaging vehicles rather than fighting, a Pentagon official says.

    Some entire Russian units have laid down their arms without a fight after confronting a surprisingly stiff Ukrainian defense, the official said. A significant number of the Russian troops are young conscripts who are poorly trained and ill-prepared for the all-out assault. And in some cases, Russian troops have deliberately punched holes in their vehicles’ gas tanks, presumably to avoid combat…

    The Pentagon official declined to say how the military made these assessments — presumably a mosaic of intelligence including statements from captured Russian soldiers and communications intercepts — or how widespread these setbacks may be across the sprawling battlefield….

    But taken together, these factors may help explain why Russian forces, including an ominous 40-mile convoy of tanks and armored vehicles near Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, have come to a near crawl in the past day or two…

    1

  5. Thanks, moonbat, 

    I came back because I forgot 2 points I wanted to make:  The first being that one you made about the Russian troops sabotaging Putin's invasion.

    The second is that in the future, the time we're in now may be looked upon as the time democracies the world over united, and helped a small country defend itself from a vicious and unprovoked attack by the 2nd largest Autocracy on the planet.  And that the democracies, by doing so, helped take Russia down both militarily and economically.

    Right now, I feel like we're at a critical point. 

    For those of us here in America, and for the rest of the world.

    Humanities future hangs in the balance.

    An Autocracy doesn't care about global warming.  Not unless the leader does.  And usually, leaders of Autocracies don't have time to worry about the health of the planet.  They're too worried about losing power, and having their own health terminated by an assassination or execution.

    Only democracies are mobile and dexterous enough to move and meet the ensuing changes that global warming will bring.

    Hopefully, after this SOTU address, we can start to see tRUMP and tRUMPism start their fade into obscurity.

    Remember, the D's need to keep the House and Senate this year.  And after that, we worry about the critical '24 election.  And after that…  You get my point.

    2

  6. One last thing.

    But an important one:  According to Axios, Ukrainian officials were warned about a plot against Zelensky.

    The warning apparently came from Russia's FSS (Federal Security Service).  

    I guess not all of the folks in Russia's security forces approve of Putin's War.

    If this is true, Putin now has to worry about dissidents inside his security force.  Not for nothin', but that's not exactly a good sign for Vlad the Invader.

    Good!  Maybe the fucker will die from stress.

    2

  7. <i>

    According to Axios, Ukrainian officials were warned about a plot against Zelensky.

    The warning apparently came from Russia's FSS (Federal Security Service).  

    </i>

    Sounds likely though I think you mean "FSB" ??????????? ?????? ????????????.  At his  worst Putin seems to feel officials  should not be assassinated. Shot after trial? Well maybe.

    Also having Zelensky alive might be useful.

  8. "If we’d gotten started on weaning ourselves from fossil fuels back when people first started talking about it"

    You mean 1973?  Because that's when it became very obvious it was a problem.  So you'll forgive me for not holding my breath.

    1

    • You mean 1973?  Because that's when it became very obvious it was a problem.  So you'll forgive me for not holding my breath.

      You're kind of proving my point, and I don't think retroactive breath holding is possible. 

  10. My own personal theory when looking at the stalled 40-mile stalled baggage-train is that this is the reserve army with the 203mm nuclear capable arty rolled in and the order was given to go NBC when Kyiv resisted and a bunch of Russian officers said no freaking way and it stalled there after there was a couple of field court-martial and executions.

    1

Comments are closed.