Okay. The Russians have (pretty much) carved off the chunk of the Donbas they wanted and now have nowhere else to go. The Ukrainians have vowed to fight back but--despite constant breathless Western media reports to the contrary--have not been effective at holding back Russian forces. We're clearly at a stalemate (or close enough to see the stalemate coming).
So....how does this end? Yeah, this is why I initially thought the idea of Russia invading Ukraine was so preposterous to begin with because it has no obvious conclusion. From here, I presume Russia will carve off the Donbas and the Ukrainians (w/NATO support) will continue to fire shells into that territory (which they were already doing) and there will be low level skirmishing for the next decade or so. As for Crimea, remember folks: Crimea never belonged to Kiev and is much too strategically valuable to Moscow to give up. (*)
Are the Russians going to take over Kiev? No. They've made (almost) no effort to do so, never made any overtures in that direction and don't have any motivation to do that now. Outside of the American media, I don't see that taking Kiev was ever an imperative for the Russians nor would it be. The recent firing on Kiev was aimed at imports of foreign weapons and there is likely to be similar attacks on future imports. Will the Russians refrain from killing NATO representatives along with the weapons? We are told that there are no Americans in country, but I doubt that's true and what will happen if American "advisors" are among the dead? Who will be responsible for that escalation?
Are the Ukrainians going to sue for peace? No. They had their chance to do so months ago and chose American weapons instead. Zelensky is determined to fight to the death--and NATO is determined to make sure his dream comes true.
Will the Russians continue on to Odessa? It kinda looks like that's what they're trying to do but without naval support, I don't see how they could take it or hold it. And I don't see what the purpose of taking or holding it would be anyway. And, though Putin's justifications have been hitherto ignored, he does have justifications for taking (dare I says "liberating"?) the Donbas, which he does not have for Odessa. Any attempt to take over the remaining Black Sea-adjacent territory would be strategically lucrative, but not in any way justified and would be extremely militarily difficult. Since the West has never cared for his justifications, does that embolden Putin to aim for more territory or does he stick to the script?
Will NATO put boots on the ground? No, I don't think so. NATO doesn't give a shit about Ukrainian territory or the Ukrainian people. Inflicting heavy losses on Russian forces might be jolly good fun but it would vastly increase the chances of a larger war, so I doubt that NATO boots on the ground is coming soon. (Though don't forget about those "advisors" that could inadvertently suck NATO into something more than the proxy war they've enjoyed so far)
That said, I wouldn't surprised to see more American, French and/or British warships camping out in the Black Sea (a redux of the Crimean War). Because taking Crimea from Russia is NATO's ultimate goal. Crimea is the main base for the Russian navy (and has been for as long as there has ever been a Russian navy). Basically Crimea is the one worthwhile piece of territory the Russians have and taking that from them has been NATO's aim since long before there was a NATO.
Will Crimea be returned to Ukraine? Well, considering that Ukraine never controlled Crimea, I don't see how that's even possible. If NATO thinks they have enough justification and enough firepower to push the Russians out of Crimea, then eventually they will give that a try. But, I'd say we're a long way from that at this point. That would be WWIII but as long as the People of the Western world can be assured that they are righteous, then Crimea will be the hill on which we fight. Then again, if NATO does take Crimea from Russia, they won't be handing it over to Kiev any time soon anyway, so the question is moot.
Will the Donbas be returned to Ukraine? Not as long as there is enough popular support inside of Donbas for Moscow rather than Kiev, and/or enough Russian firepower to hold it. How strong is that popular support? I dunno, the American media has never bothered to suggest that support for Moscow exists, so the Truth is just never gonna be discovered, I guess. It may well be that the American media is correct but it has made no effort to discern the reality, so I have no idea if the people of the Donbas prefer Moscow or Kiev. The Americans reflexively suggest that taking back the Donbas should be up to the Ukrainian people--but does that include the Ukrainians living in the Donbas that support the Russian incursion? The Crimean people voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in 2014, (though the West has always found that referendum to be inconvenient), might the people of Luhansk and Donetsk make the same choice if offered?
Will Ukraine secure the safe livelihood of the people of the Donbas if the Russians are expelled? I don't see why they would. The people of the Donbas are prisoners of either Moscow or Kiev, no matter how this turns out. I don't see how anyone living there will find any kind of prosperous future.
Will the Russians invade other countries? I suppose Moldova (Transnistria) is still potentially in play, but I would suggest Russia never had any intention of invading any other countries. The idea that that's even on the table is just Western media paranoia. When you completely cut off Russia and the Russian people from communicating with the rest of the world, we think we are cutting them off, but we're just cutting ourselves off from finding out what they really think and feel. The censorship, sanctions and boycotting of our own doing just make it harder for us to determine what's going on.
Will the Russians use nuclear weapons? This sort of discussion merely allows American minds to drift toward using that strategy for ourselves. The a priori hatred of Russia allows us to pretend we are victims, we are righteous and we are justified in whatever immorality it takes to defeat them. (**)
Is Russia losing the war? Well, it looks to me like they've done just about everything they set out to do. The Ukrainians are said to be winning the war because they've kept the Russians out of Kiev, but since the Russians have never tried to invade Kiev and the Ukrainians have not stopped much of anything the Russians are doing in the Donbas, I don't see how anyone can say the Ukrainians are winning (and yet it feels like I'm the only one who is saying that). This rah-rah media bullshit is just to remind that we hate Russia and that massive aid to Ukraine (while Americans struggle to procure baby formula) is a good thing.
What happens to Zelensky? Zelensky will eventually come to the USA, where he will be treated like a hero for the rest of his life. If he stays long enough for NATO weapons to make a difference, then he will be feted like a conqueror; if he fails to drive the Russians out, he will be feted like a martyr. Either way, he'll be coming to USA where the hero worship will be so much better than in Ukraine. As for Ukraine, it is but a stepping stone for that ambitious young man.
Hasn't the Russian economy collapsed? No but I don't have much faith in it going forward, especially if Russian consumers are more or less barred from Europe. I think Russia's economy will be fine but there will be little to do with any wealth accumulated, except to go to China and/or India. Russia is self-sustaining, though, and as much as we keep pretending that sanctions on Russian oil will cripple their economy, that was never true (and gets less true every day that American consumers subsidize that geopolitical choice at the gas pumps).
Is the rest of the world on our side? No. This is strictly a NATO affair. It is telling to see who did not join the Western alliance: China, India, Israel, Brazil, South Africa, the Persian Gulf states, and even Mexico (***) were at the very least hesitant to condemn. And shocks to the global economy suggest Russia and Ukraine are perhaps more connected than we realized. Japan and Australia are being dragged into the NATO alliance whether they like it or not, though I don't see any upside for them as to how this war turns out. If Putin's naked aggression is so obvious, then why is it just USA and the Europeans banging this drum? Where is the grand worldwide coalition to stop this naked power grab? (Uh, no one agrees with us because they are not bombarded by manipulative American media the way we were)
We're telling ourselves that we are righteous, that the Ukrainians are brave, that Putin is a madman. But really the world is turning to Asia and this war may well be the hinge point that makes Europe and USA irrelevant for the rest of the century. Cutting Russia out of SWIFT just creates avenues of competition to that Anglo-American World Order that we keep talking about. I think the world in general has shown that it isn't falling in lockstep behind the Americans again any time soon. Biden had to beg the Saudis to answer his phone calls. Africa and the Arab world are no more wary of Russia than they are of Europe. Latin America is on the cusp of throwing in its lot with China right as American gov't spending is maxed out (a completely avoidable outcome that Americans have been courting for the last 200 years or so of our neglect of the rest of the Western hemisphere).
Frankly the American alliance structure hasn't been this weak since before the McKinley administration. I know, I know: Trump and Putin. (****) Why solve problems when the easy scapegoats are so readily available?
Okay, let's do a quick recap of how we got here. In 2013, the EU dumped Yanukovich at the altar after three years of negotiations for Ukraine to join the EU. In the West we blame Yanukovych but that's just not true. He desperately wanted to join the EU but needed economic inducements: "Yanukovich estimated that he needed $160 billion over three years to make up for the trade Ukraine stood to lose with Russia, and to help cushion the pain from reforms the EU was demanding. The EU refused to give such a sum, which it said was exaggerated and unjustified...The EU offered 610 million euros ($839 million) immediately. EU officials said increased trade, combined with various aid and financing programs, might go some way to providing Kiev with the investment it needed."
It's right there, folks: the EU, IMF and USA could've bought Ukraine in 2013 for $50b and they laughed in Yanukovych's face after three years of leading him on. Too high a price, you say? Well, after the country has been flattened and thousands of Ukrainians are dead, it took President Biden no time at all to cough $40b (on the eve of an American recession, no less). The message is clear: Ukraine is important enough for weapons, not important enough for European trade.
From 2010-2013, you know what Putin did to stop Ukraine joining the EU? Nothing. Indeed, he even offered to mediate negotiations to make it easier (a request the EU rejected). Putin didn't stop it because he knew he didn't have to. He knew the Europeans were disingenuous from the start--though I suspect even he was caught off-guard by the western supported uprisings in Kiev that led to the overthrow of a democratically elected leader, all of which the West, of course, still blames on Putin (and...uh...how did Putin benefit from any of that...?).
The EU dumped Ukraine in 2013 because they didn't want to finance Ukraine's entry to the EU. But in 2022 the EU seems eager to pour money into cleaning up the wreckage of an invasion that woul've been avoided if the EU followed through on its negotiations. Although, don't be surprised if they leave Ukraine hanging again--that NATO curtain of defense is going up to the west of Ukraine, not the east.
USA, EU, NATO and the IMF used the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder. Zelensky gets to act like a hero when in fact he did everything he could to encourage the destruction of his own homeland. If the world really cared about ending the violence in Ukraine, we would've been encouraging Zelensky to have peace talks. Instead, we gave him billions of dollars of guns (a real bold step for peace), while his people suffered.
I've never been a big fan of our post-Cold War treatment of Russia. It gives too much power to our defense industry at the expense of developing useful heavy industry (like expanding high speed internet or preparing for space travel) and allows our politicians to wave a lazy hand at an age old enemy instead of dealing with reality. Booting Russia out of Swift is a really dumb idea, but it is precisely in keeping with how the West has treated Russia for decades. The whole point of a system like Swift is to keep all the countries of the world on the same standard. If you start pushing nations out, it is unnecessarily cruel to Human populations and leads to competition in the long run. The Asian Development Bank is up and running and if backed with Russian oil and gold, seems like we should be fighting to keep Russia in Swift rather than out.
It was Covid-19 that wildly overstretched gov't spending and interrupted the global supply chain of goods (particularly food) all over the world. People all over the world are vulnerable to shortages in grain from Ukraine and fertilizer from Russia--if you thought it was American missiles that kept you safe at night, you were mistaken. It was the well-functioning supply of goods and the necessary banking infrastructure to keep it all going. By invading Ukraine, Putin has shown how little power USA and Europe actually possess to finance or stabilize anything.
USA is in a precarious financial predicament right now. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell desperately needs to do two things: 1) he absolutely must raise interest rates to keep inflation from overheating and 2) he absolutely must lower interest rates to keep the consumer economy from stalling. Hmmmmm....do you see the pickle we're in right now? If global supply shortages of food and oil continue on, it is the American economy that has the most to lose. And printing more money--right as we're shutting Russia out--is not the solution to the problem.
The end is in sight...but from here I can't tell whose end it is.
(*) Ask yourself: Was the Crimean War a war with Ukraine?
(**) When the American economy finally shatters and the society is plunged into anarchy, that is when the danger of nuclear war will be greatest. When we no longer have market dominance, then military dominance will be all we have left. And that military dominance truly takes the form of overwhelming cruise missile capacity. When we no longer have the ability to outspend our enemies, then we will be forced to empty our stockpile of missiles. I was always hoping that American financial dominance would last at least through my lifetime--and at the moment, I still believe it will--but Americans flinging missiles at its creditors will be how this whole nuclear war thing comes about despite what you've been told your whole life.
I just point this out as a reminder that Putin has said on numerous occasions that the great tragedy of his lifetime--of the entire 20th century--was the fall of the Soviet Union. I have no doubt that he would relish pushing USA to its demise, especially since we have scorned his every attempt to join us and have used our dominance to bully Russia even after its threat has vastly diminished.
USA is a giant cow waiting to be tipped over and Putin is just the shitkicker to do it. If China's productivity combine with Russia's gold and oil exports and taps into Arab dissatisfaction with the West in general and Africa and Latin America's inherent distrust of USA and Europe, then the world becomes a whole new place. And given America's profligate spending, which it clearly has no interest in correcting, our debts could become crushing and severely hampers USA's ability to stride the world like the colossus we've long tried to be. China's steady naval development and the even playing field offered up by cyber-warfare make USA extremely vulnerable to our own bad habits. Just as the Soviet Union collapsed because it could not keep up with USA's productivity, USA may well fall prey to China's productivity. Are you ready for the Sino World Order?
(***) The BRICS countries have announced they're ready to expand their membership. If I were them, the first country on my wish list would be Mexico. A rising manufacturing and exporting power with a large sophisticated population currently underserved by American markets, Mexico is exactly the sort of country that would be next up for the BRICS, no?
Wouldn't it be hilarious--just a thought experiment--if after luring in Mexico (a country that is not currently engaged in a trade war with China), the Chinese were able to convince Mexico to import Chinese defense technologies? I mean, Mexico isn't a member of NATO, after all, and war with the USA is not at all impossible, Mexico might feel the need to defend itself against Yankee aggression and its tactics of undermining sovereign gov'ts. And, then wouldn't it be funny--just follow me here--if Mexico's new allies reminded Mexico that they never actually ratified the treaty that gave Texas independence? And, of course, given the sizable population in Texas of Mexican heritage, wouldn't it be a hoot--obviously could never happen!--if Russian and/or Chinese weapons suddenly flooded in to liberate Texas from the evil USA? I'm just saying....obviously this is absurd...no way this could ever happen...right?
Clearly a bizarre fantasy...but take a second now and re-examine how the EU and the IMF and USA have treated Ukraine over the years. Is it sinking in yet? Or has the rah-rah American media completely taken over your brain? Do you consider Texas to be part of your ancestral territory and worth fighting for?
(****) Ahhh, remember 2005?
Viktor Yushchenko: "We're talking about the country where the number one problem remains to be corruption. We're talking about the country where the huge problem remains the problem of poverty....our accession to WTO by the end of 2005, the lifting of the trade sanctions on Ukrainian exported goods, Ukraine's accession to European and Euro-Atlantic security alliances......."
