Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Michael Wild's avatar

When the history of this war is written one of the great talking points will be how quickly crossed were the Western red lines about providing military aid. The war is only 16 months old and while Ukraine wants more (notably very long range artillery) really they’ve got just about everything they’ve asked for albeit not in the quantities they desired. Sure I’d have liked it to come faster but really the rate of arming and progress has been quite remarkable.

The other talking point will be the transformation of Putin from masterful risk taker to ineffectual blusterer. I’ve lost count of the number of times he’s threatened nuclear retaliation only to demonstrate that the big problem with nuclear weapons is you can’t really use them.

My feeling is what’s happened with Putin and the West has been a reckless bully who’s pushed a placid giant too far. Every step he took, he got away with because the West didn’t really want to fight. but he didn’t realize that he was building increasing resentment in a stronger adversary. When he finally pushed too far the giant roared with rage and reacted with a strength Putin never saw coming. The economic sanctions alone are unprecedented and now the West has got the oil price cap going the medium to long term outlook for the Russian economy looks disastrous. And by medium term I mean in about 18 months. I can’t see them being lifted while Putin or someone like minded rules Russia.

Expand full comment
Mark Segal's avatar

The Western response to the Russian takeover of Crimea may have been muted by the fact that Crimea has changed hands a great many times over its long history, part of which - from 1774 until the 1990s - witnessed Russian (Soviet) control of the territory. So perhaps this explains why the West responded differently to the more recent invasion of Eastern Ukraine than it did to that of Crimea - to whom Crimea belongs is hotly contestable.

To the contrary, the invasion of Ukraine proper is a big salami slice that simply could not be digested, nor is Russia anywhere near willing to contemplate giving it back, which I believe contributes to the very dangerous situation the world now faces.

Evidence suggests that Russia has found effective ways of evading the worst brunt of Western sanctions, not surprising, so they have the oxygen with which to carry on. The more they carry on, the more the Ukrainians, backed by the West, will "up the ante" in order to recover the slices it has lost or could still lose. If this results in the Russian regime feeling it's back is truly against the wall, that is when I think the West is at greatest risk to extreme reaction from Moscow.

One has to think that quietly under the hood, the US Administration has made it clear in no uncertain terms to Vladimir Putin that if he uses any nuclear weapons or power stations against Ukraine, much of Russia will be annihilated before they have a chance to retaliate - no second thoughts. With the vast sums of money and intelligence the US throws at such matters, there can be little doubt they are fully prepared to do it at little risk to themselves or others and the Russians must know this. Hence I am less concerned about a nuclear exchange than I am about the prospect of this war dragging on at great expense and loss of life for years, because the sanctions regime is insufficiently effective to choke off the Russian war machine.

Expand full comment
44 more comments...

No posts