Really nicely written, succinct and perceptive analysis. This will be very useful for some of my students in their Contemporary World Problems class. I always appreciate good, clear, and insightful writing. Thanks for writing this.
What would happen if some of the leaders of the Orthodox Church who may not be under Kremlin influence (e.g. His Holiness Bartholomew I) condemned or even ex-communicated Putin?
You either don't know what you are talking about or misread the question. The Russian and Greek Churches were already in schism over Ukranian jurisdiction before the invasion. So the answer to Josh Arnold-Foster is, not much.
What happened is worse than that. Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate (loyal to Moscow) refused to support Putin and said it directly that this is an invasion. Moscow lost the last religious influence in Kyiv.
Russian special forces attempted to assassinate the Metropolitan of the *Moscow Patriarchate* aligned section of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in Kyiv the other day. So, no, Bartholomew will not make a difference.
It wouldn’t persuade Putin to stop, if that’s your question. Russian and Greek Orthodoxy have already been in schism since the 2019 granting of autocephaly (= full independence from the Russian Church) to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by Bartholomew.
They've tried to destroy Ukrainian aviation, but thanks to US, NATO's intelligence Kyiv was aware about the launch of rockets prior and at the same minute they've been launched. That helped Ukraine save their fleet and most of the mobile radars and anti-aircraft launchers. Yes, Putin's plan is insane. To try a blitzkrieg without protecting your lines of communication and provision is madness. Also he made the mistake that any self-respected drug dealer doesn't do, Putin got high on his own propaganda. Instead of flowers he got Molotov's. Another stupidity is to start a war at the end of winter. Every tank or armoured vehicle's driver knows, driving on mud off-road you use more gas and have I high risk to stuck in it. Finally, how one Ukrainian journalist has said, Russian army has no experience of modern warfare, just colonial ones. The leveling up of Chechnya's cities and villages that almost brought annihilation to this nation or the same experience in Syria.
Thank you for this preview of tomorrow's traditional media talking points. It must be frustrating for you to be plagiarised in the way I'm seeing your work lifted, without attribution.
I would love some recommendations from this newsletter of other information sources on the war, especially on the ground, that we might be able to trust.
The West now needs to engage in a holding pattern with Putin for the medium term. He won’t be in power for ever he is 70 years old. Some concessions now that stop the bloodshed and then revisit in a decade. What we can’t do is get too drawn in and I’m glad Liz Truss was shut down over volunteers and a no-fly zone has been squarely rules out. A nuclear war helps no one.
It really depends on how much the Ukrainians are willing to suffer.
They may be willing to give up Crimea (which they weren’t getting back anyway) and Donbas but definitely not the ability to arm themselves to the teeth (which the West has every incentive to do).
Plan E: Putin is terminated and the assault ends. The most important lesson of human history is that evil individuals risen to power inflict horrifying, widespread suffering. The most important lesson of the last two centuries is that self-rule with representative, constitutionally-defined government and limited, separated powers thwarts evil individuals from inflicting great damage.
Terminating Putin means he will be replaced by a complete unknown...who was also violent and devious enough to seize control in what is essentially a long-running episode of The Godfather (except with nuclear weapons). Not an outcome anyone at State or NATO is looking to have.
If Putin goes, all of his client states may be in trouble. It really depends on who comes next. Russia could struggle on with Putin as the head for years. Iran still has client states and Russia would essentially become a giant nuclear Iran.
Yes, he wants to win. A loss may well be (literally) fatal to Putin now.
They also wouldn't be able to simply hold the positions they have now as they are too overstretched with the size of the force they brought in and would simply get picked apart by all the anti-tank, anti-air and small arms flooding in from the West (not to mention that they already have major logistics trouble simply resupplying the front lines now because those convoys are getting picked apart).
So they could try to withdraw to an area they could actually secure, hold, and resupply, which probably wouldn't be much more area beyond the Crimea and Donbas lands they had at the start of the war but that would be seen as a defeat for Putin by everybody given the huge costs Russia has suffered for the war, and it's unclear Russia would even be able to hold on to that long-term. That means that all the sanctions stay on, Russia remains an international pariah and its economy a basketcase. It would essentially become a bigger nuclear Iran or the late stage USSR, which tells you how sustainable that would be.
Putin has unleashed a genie he can't control (which is the case for most major wars).
Oh the pitfalls of hubris. Putin, a short little fart, has such abundance of pride --that it's smothered out the tiniest thread of wisdom he may have possessed at one time. PS: Also, he's got tiny hands. (I am sorry that many lives will be lost because of this fat-on-ego monster.)
This is very a intelligent opinion piece, but it is still an opinion piece. There is a perfectly viable opposing argument that carries equally viable logic, but is much more unpalatable. There is little evidence that Putin is losing popular support in Russia. There are substantial protests against him but I've been on protest marches in London against Nuclear Weapons, Student Grant Cuts, the first Gulf War, the Second Gulf War, Poll Tax and Trump's visit. All those protests were notable failures and that's in a democracy where leadership popularity matters. Protests in Moscow and St Petersburg mean absolutely nothing.
President Putin will remain in control until someone opposes him with more power and control than he has and currently there are no reports of anyone with anything remotely resembling sufficient power to dislodge him. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but it would be rash to assume they do.
One British leader said of the American military that they always find the right way of doing things, usually by trying every other way first. This may also be true of the Russian military. Just because they have fucked up in Ukraine, does not mean they will lose, it simply means they will take time to bring their numerical and logisticial superiority into effect. The longer it goes on, the more brutal and indiscriminate they will become, but Putin has not even begun to enter the stage of murdering generals who refuse to carry out his will. But we should be under no illusion, he will do that if he had to.
In the absence of specific intelligence indicating that there is some form of growing opposition to Putin either within the political classes or among the general population, we should assume that Putin's grip on power is unchallenged. While he remains in charge, he will simply increase the level of force used against Ukraine until, if need be, the country either surrenders or is utterly destroyed. As a result of that, he may have to murder tens or hundreds of thousands of Russians to control the domestic backlash but there is no indication that he would hesitate from that level of tyranny. Vladimir Putin does not take notice of opinion polls. Until there is something to stop him, nothing will stop him.
The Russian army and air force are losing men and equipment at an unsustainable rate right now, and no, they don't actually have a logistical advantage. Russian logistics are crap, and with the sanctions, their economy is now a basketcase, they won't be able to get much else new (unless China starts supplying them). They've already used up pretty much all their cruise missiles. They're afraid of flying their best aircraft because their planes have such a high chance of being shot down over Ukraine. Pretty soon, Putin will be down to green recruits or crappy ill-trained reservists using Soviet-era material against a fully mobilized Ukrainian army that has had experience fighting for 7 years now and now with a flood of modern NATO weaponry.
All the good units are still back home. They call them Guards units because they are literally defenders of the most important stuff, including Putin.
The endgame here is simple. Putin wants Ukraine broken like Iraq is broken. He doesn't need to take twenty years to do it, and he doesn't give a damn about trying to preserve a state or civilians. He's going to break a lot of stuff and kill a lot of people with artillery; then he's going to pull out and even talk about "humanitarianism."
The thing about NATO admission has nothing to do with rearming Ukraine. It has to do with *fixing* Ukraine the way NATO and the EU fixed former broken criminal paradises like Bulgaria. A thriving state with preferred access to the EU agro market (read the treaties--some surprising stuff in there) and a flourishing, stable civic order is a huge threat to his authority. And to *him*, because he is the manager of a gang of very dangerous thugs who will not like this development one bit. Oh, and eventually the Ukrainians might make some military noises. Nothing to like here at all, for him.
I've been explaining this as if Mexico were to join the Warsaw Pact. (Wobbly I know, but you meet people where they're at.) It's shameful but also obvious that the US has liked Mexico pretty broken and docile for the last 300 years at least.
Eh, the Guard units who've been in action haven't been all that impressive. In any case, while Putin is certainly wrecking Ukraine, he's also uniting them with a deep hatred of Russia that will last generations. And declaring victory and going home may not work out that well for him either because people will still see it as a defeat (just as people saw the American withdrawal from Afghanistan as a defeat) and the sanctions will have wrecked the Russian economy. The future now is actually pretty clear: even if Putin stays in power, he's essentially transformed Russia in to a bigger Iran with nukes that's a client state of China.
Really nicely written, succinct and perceptive analysis. This will be very useful for some of my students in their Contemporary World Problems class. I always appreciate good, clear, and insightful writing. Thanks for writing this.
What would happen if some of the leaders of the Orthodox Church who may not be under Kremlin influence (e.g. His Holiness Bartholomew I) condemned or even ex-communicated Putin?
They are among his biggest supporters and are cross with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church for separating from them.
You either don't know what you are talking about or misread the question. The Russian and Greek Churches were already in schism over Ukranian jurisdiction before the invasion. So the answer to Josh Arnold-Foster is, not much.
a pun?
What happened is worse than that. Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate (loyal to Moscow) refused to support Putin and said it directly that this is an invasion. Moscow lost the last religious influence in Kyiv.
Russian special forces attempted to assassinate the Metropolitan of the *Moscow Patriarchate* aligned section of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in Kyiv the other day. So, no, Bartholomew will not make a difference.
It wouldn’t persuade Putin to stop, if that’s your question. Russian and Greek Orthodoxy have already been in schism since the 2019 granting of autocephaly (= full independence from the Russian Church) to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by Bartholomew.
Bartholomew called Zelenskyy to express his support (he tweeted about it).
The ROC has already excommunicated Bartholomew.
"It is now as likely that there will be regime [change] in Moscow as in Kyiv."
Machiavel also wrote that it is worst of all for a prince to be despised for corruption and offenses against women. And guess where Putin is now.
Ha good point
They've tried to destroy Ukrainian aviation, but thanks to US, NATO's intelligence Kyiv was aware about the launch of rockets prior and at the same minute they've been launched. That helped Ukraine save their fleet and most of the mobile radars and anti-aircraft launchers. Yes, Putin's plan is insane. To try a blitzkrieg without protecting your lines of communication and provision is madness. Also he made the mistake that any self-respected drug dealer doesn't do, Putin got high on his own propaganda. Instead of flowers he got Molotov's. Another stupidity is to start a war at the end of winter. Every tank or armoured vehicle's driver knows, driving on mud off-road you use more gas and have I high risk to stuck in it. Finally, how one Ukrainian journalist has said, Russian army has no experience of modern warfare, just colonial ones. The leveling up of Chechnya's cities and villages that almost brought annihilation to this nation or the same experience in Syria.
Thank you for this preview of tomorrow's traditional media talking points. It must be frustrating for you to be plagiarised in the way I'm seeing your work lifted, without attribution.
I would love some recommendations from this newsletter of other information sources on the war, especially on the ground, that we might be able to trust.
The West now needs to engage in a holding pattern with Putin for the medium term. He won’t be in power for ever he is 70 years old. Some concessions now that stop the bloodshed and then revisit in a decade. What we can’t do is get too drawn in and I’m glad Liz Truss was shut down over volunteers and a no-fly zone has been squarely rules out. A nuclear war helps no one.
Concessions are for Ukraine to decide.
It really depends on how much the Ukrainians are willing to suffer.
They may be willing to give up Crimea (which they weren’t getting back anyway) and Donbas but definitely not the ability to arm themselves to the teeth (which the West has every incentive to do).
Plan E: Putin is terminated and the assault ends. The most important lesson of human history is that evil individuals risen to power inflict horrifying, widespread suffering. The most important lesson of the last two centuries is that self-rule with representative, constitutionally-defined government and limited, separated powers thwarts evil individuals from inflicting great damage.
We can't invade in the face of several thousand nuclear warheads. That means the only people who can do him in are the Russian Army.
Terminating Putin means he will be replaced by a complete unknown...who was also violent and devious enough to seize control in what is essentially a long-running episode of The Godfather (except with nuclear weapons). Not an outcome anyone at State or NATO is looking to have.
clear at this point that Putin must be stopped, as he has no intention of doing so himself.
"It is now as likely that there will be regime change in Moscow as in Kyiv."
How about Caracas?
If Putin goes, all of his client states may be in trouble. It really depends on who comes next. Russia could struggle on with Putin as the head for years. Iran still has client states and Russia would essentially become a giant nuclear Iran.
This is superb.
But does he want to win? A prolonged war means Ukraine not joining NATO for a long time.
Yes, he wants to win. A loss may well be (literally) fatal to Putin now.
They also wouldn't be able to simply hold the positions they have now as they are too overstretched with the size of the force they brought in and would simply get picked apart by all the anti-tank, anti-air and small arms flooding in from the West (not to mention that they already have major logistics trouble simply resupplying the front lines now because those convoys are getting picked apart).
So they could try to withdraw to an area they could actually secure, hold, and resupply, which probably wouldn't be much more area beyond the Crimea and Donbas lands they had at the start of the war but that would be seen as a defeat for Putin by everybody given the huge costs Russia has suffered for the war, and it's unclear Russia would even be able to hold on to that long-term. That means that all the sanctions stay on, Russia remains an international pariah and its economy a basketcase. It would essentially become a bigger nuclear Iran or the late stage USSR, which tells you how sustainable that would be.
Putin has unleashed a genie he can't control (which is the case for most major wars).
Sow the wind. . . .
Oh the pitfalls of hubris. Putin, a short little fart, has such abundance of pride --that it's smothered out the tiniest thread of wisdom he may have possessed at one time. PS: Also, he's got tiny hands. (I am sorry that many lives will be lost because of this fat-on-ego monster.)
In the words of the GOAT Mike Tyson… Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. ...
This is very a intelligent opinion piece, but it is still an opinion piece. There is a perfectly viable opposing argument that carries equally viable logic, but is much more unpalatable. There is little evidence that Putin is losing popular support in Russia. There are substantial protests against him but I've been on protest marches in London against Nuclear Weapons, Student Grant Cuts, the first Gulf War, the Second Gulf War, Poll Tax and Trump's visit. All those protests were notable failures and that's in a democracy where leadership popularity matters. Protests in Moscow and St Petersburg mean absolutely nothing.
President Putin will remain in control until someone opposes him with more power and control than he has and currently there are no reports of anyone with anything remotely resembling sufficient power to dislodge him. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but it would be rash to assume they do.
One British leader said of the American military that they always find the right way of doing things, usually by trying every other way first. This may also be true of the Russian military. Just because they have fucked up in Ukraine, does not mean they will lose, it simply means they will take time to bring their numerical and logisticial superiority into effect. The longer it goes on, the more brutal and indiscriminate they will become, but Putin has not even begun to enter the stage of murdering generals who refuse to carry out his will. But we should be under no illusion, he will do that if he had to.
In the absence of specific intelligence indicating that there is some form of growing opposition to Putin either within the political classes or among the general population, we should assume that Putin's grip on power is unchallenged. While he remains in charge, he will simply increase the level of force used against Ukraine until, if need be, the country either surrenders or is utterly destroyed. As a result of that, he may have to murder tens or hundreds of thousands of Russians to control the domestic backlash but there is no indication that he would hesitate from that level of tyranny. Vladimir Putin does not take notice of opinion polls. Until there is something to stop him, nothing will stop him.
The Russian army and air force are losing men and equipment at an unsustainable rate right now, and no, they don't actually have a logistical advantage. Russian logistics are crap, and with the sanctions, their economy is now a basketcase, they won't be able to get much else new (unless China starts supplying them). They've already used up pretty much all their cruise missiles. They're afraid of flying their best aircraft because their planes have such a high chance of being shot down over Ukraine. Pretty soon, Putin will be down to green recruits or crappy ill-trained reservists using Soviet-era material against a fully mobilized Ukrainian army that has had experience fighting for 7 years now and now with a flood of modern NATO weaponry.
All the good units are still back home. They call them Guards units because they are literally defenders of the most important stuff, including Putin.
The endgame here is simple. Putin wants Ukraine broken like Iraq is broken. He doesn't need to take twenty years to do it, and he doesn't give a damn about trying to preserve a state or civilians. He's going to break a lot of stuff and kill a lot of people with artillery; then he's going to pull out and even talk about "humanitarianism."
The thing about NATO admission has nothing to do with rearming Ukraine. It has to do with *fixing* Ukraine the way NATO and the EU fixed former broken criminal paradises like Bulgaria. A thriving state with preferred access to the EU agro market (read the treaties--some surprising stuff in there) and a flourishing, stable civic order is a huge threat to his authority. And to *him*, because he is the manager of a gang of very dangerous thugs who will not like this development one bit. Oh, and eventually the Ukrainians might make some military noises. Nothing to like here at all, for him.
I've been explaining this as if Mexico were to join the Warsaw Pact. (Wobbly I know, but you meet people where they're at.) It's shameful but also obvious that the US has liked Mexico pretty broken and docile for the last 300 years at least.
Eh, the Guard units who've been in action haven't been all that impressive. In any case, while Putin is certainly wrecking Ukraine, he's also uniting them with a deep hatred of Russia that will last generations. And declaring victory and going home may not work out that well for him either because people will still see it as a defeat (just as people saw the American withdrawal from Afghanistan as a defeat) and the sanctions will have wrecked the Russian economy. The future now is actually pretty clear: even if Putin stays in power, he's essentially transformed Russia in to a bigger Iran with nukes that's a client state of China.
Freedman sure knows how to write. Awesome piece