More, it's because the collapse of the prestige of the Russian military poses a kind of existential threat to Russia. China, which opened this game pledging support for Russia in order to gain a precedent for its own longed-for seizure of Taiwan, must now be looking west at Russia with a growing appetite. If Russia proves gutless as well as toothless, why not take Siberia or some of the 'stans? Taiwan can wait.
Further, I notice with alarm that American and NATO support for the Ukrainian war continues well beyond what we can plausibly deny. There are aspects of some of this that we can pretend might or might not have been us, but there's no doubt that the US military and intelligence community are outright involved in the war. One can only carry out acts of war, even against an aggressor nation like Russia, for so long without tripping any tripwires that are out there.
Our intelligence community continues to assert in public that they see no signs that Russia's nuclear forces might be readying for action. Perhaps; but they saw no signs that Pakistan nor Libya were developing nuclear weapons at all. Assuredly watching the Russians has been a major focus of theirs, but so too was watching the Taliban -- which they assured us could not hope to advance rapidly on Kabul.
The Musk proposal conveys everything Russia wants, allowing them -- like the Mouth of Sauron's ask -- to gain at the table what they otherwise might have to fight a long war to obtain. Perhaps they do not have the strength for that war, nuclear weapons or not. Yet we also do not have the strength our leadership seems to believe that we do; we are no longer the power we once were, the one that bestrode the world at the end of Reagan's time. Our military now is far smaller, its equipment exhausted by decades of war, and presently unable to recruit soldiers or sailors or even many Marines. The nation is too divided for a draft, especially for another foreign adventure in a place to which few Americans have personal ties.
Perhaps the beatitudes are right, and the peacemakers are blessed.
14 comments:
Some mildly disjointed thoughts.
The PRC has been looking on Russian Siberia for some time, and it has most of the area already sewn up; it's just a matter carrying out the agreement and its sequel. Xi already has Putin's agreement that the PRC could--should--colonize Siberia under the guise of supplying the equipment and labor for exploiting the resources that Putin has agreed to sell the PRC. There's no need for anything overt on the PRC's part for another generation or two, after which the Chinese Anschluss will be a virtually done deal before any unit of the PLA marches in.
I see no need to deny US/NATO support for Ukraine. We should, on the contrary, be open about it. The premise that we're not the power we once were isn't particularly relevant until later. We, ideally including NATO (although German perfidy and overt racism--the dumb Slavs are just too stupid to learn how to drive German tanks is Scholz' latest excuse for not sending any over--effectively blocks any serious NATO action), only need to be stronger than Russia.
If Russia wins, though, the later comes home. A Russian conquering of Ukraine will tell Xi that he can invade the Republic of China with impunity. It won't matter that the conquering would likely be a drawn-out and bloody affair for the PLA, the US and the West generally will be too spent--emotionally and politically, if not necessarily militarily--from its failure with Ukraine even to begin to oppose it with anything other than with empty words. And the loss of the RoC will cement PRC control over the shipping lanes for resource poor Japan and the Republic of Korea and for Pacific transport dependent American economy.
Eric Hines
The US has been isolated from the realities of war for a very long time. The shorthand for "realities of war" is not dead soldiers. It is dead wives and kids. The fact is, we have exported our conflicts all over the globe for years with very little risk at home. Hence we have forgotten the potential. No soldier (or Marine) has had to worry about coming home to burned homestead and ruin.
Here is my take- the nordstream blowout and the attack on the bridge to Crimea just clarified for everyone including the Russians that vital civilian infrastructure is fair game.
Those fiber optic cables across the oceans? LNG tankers?
communication satellites? Alaskan pipeline? Terminal at Valdez? SF teams taking out power grids? etc etc.
We are at the beginning of some serious shit.
BTW, We just had a hospital hack too. Cyber attacks fall into this category.
Pushing the Russians into an existential corner is a bad idea. Remember the Russian guy who called in artillery on his own position when surrounded by ISIS? Same idea. With nukes. There is no way, never-no-how the Russians are going to let themselves be eliminated without a dire price being paid by the west.
We are "led" by arrogant, idiotic fools who have, all their lives, been able to evade consequences for their actions.
...the nordstream blowout and the attack on the bridge to Crimea just clarified for everyone including the Russians that vital civilian infrastructure is fair game.
Putin has been operating on that premise since his invasion. That's why he's engaged so enthusiastically in physically attacking hospitals, apartment buildings, residential neighborhoods, schools, etc. Even the civilian population itself is a fair game "infrastructure" target. See the mass graves filled with tortured women and children along with men in every one of the newly liberated barbarian-occupied cities and villages.
Pushing the Russians into an existential corner is a bad idea.
The only one who thinks Russia is being pushed into an existential corner is Putin. Russia hasn't got anything at all that anyone wants that can't be gotten far more cheaply and profitably through some sort of economic agreement. For an extreme and acquisional example, see the Russia-PRC Siberian resource agreement.
We can't let our decisions be governed by what Putin thinks is an existential threat. Everything is an existential threat to him, including what he gains through naked, land-grabbing conquering. He just considers those acquisitions to be part of Metropolitan Russia and anything that on the other side of that new boundary becomes the new threat.
Eric Hines
The only one who thinks Russia is being pushed into an existential corner is Putin.
Unfortunately, he is also the only one who decides on Russian usage of nuclear weapons.
Back before the Iraq war, a counterargument that was often deployed was: "Sure, Saddam is bad. He's really evil. But if you take him out, Iran is going to be unfettered. They'll spread across Iraq to Syria, menace Israel, Saudi Arabia and the free flow of oil at market prices. Bad as he is, Saddam is the only real hedge against them."
I was right there with the ones who said, "No, Saddam is evil and needs to go. Maybe once people see that liberation and freedom is a real possibility, the whole Middle East might change." It didn't, though. The skeptics were right about what removing Saddam would do in liberating Iran, and we turned out to be unable to set up a government in Iraq that could avoid the temptation of sectarian revenge that made liberation a temporary and local product at best. Just the other day I was reading about Tal Afar, where once the US cavalry received great praise from the local government, having fallen under the sway of Iranian-backed militias trafficking weapons to the Syrian war.
http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2006_02_12_archive.html#114011231778283216
Maybe it's best to stabilize the situation, and take the win that comes from having shown the Russian army to be toothless. Russia won't be a danger to its neighbors like it has been because it's lost the aura of being capable of fighting a war like this. Maybe that will buy the 'another generation or two' out of China that you speculate about, by which time there won't be nearly as many people in the People's Republic due to their pending demographic collapse.
I do think Taiwan has to be fought for if it has to be, but having divided our resources we would be fighting on two fronts. We can do more for Taiwan if we aren't deploying so many operators in Ukraine.
I do think Taiwan has to be fought for if it has to be, but having divided our resources we would be fighting on two fronts. We can do more for Taiwan if we aren't deploying so many operators in Ukraine.
Win, lose, or draw, Putin will still have his nuclear weapons, and if the West continues to back away from that threat, that only emboldens Putin and Xi.
It's necessary to crush the barbarian promptly (and yes, those nukes, still), which will free the West--particularly us--to defend the RoC without having to deal with Ukraine, or the sequelae of a Western loss there, at the same time. Promptness, though, requires us to stop dilly-dallying and transfer arms, ammunition, other supplies, and training to Ukraine as fast as Ukraine can absorb them. And crushing the barbarian quickly may well give Xi pause about invading the RoC.
I'm also not sure the Arab-Persian conflict is that apt an analogy for the Russia-Ukraine conflict (or the PRC-RoC conflict, come to that). There are lessons to be learned, certainly, but the two (three) conflicts involve two (three) entirely disparate sets of cultures, two (three) entirely disparate sets of mindset.
Eric Hines
I'm also not sure the Arab-Persian conflict is that apt an analogy for the Russia-Ukraine conflict
What about the Serbs vs the rest of the fragmented former Yugoslavia?
What about the Serbs vs the rest of the fragmented former Yugoslavia?
No idea. I don't know enough about Yugoslavia or the Balkans generally.
Eric Hines
There are no good guys here. Not Russia, not Ukraine, not the USA, just a choking miasma of dis-information, lies, slander, false flags. The US has lied to convince the public there is some legitimate reason to get us into wars for years. Gulf of Tonkin. Domino's. WMD. It is so blatant. The WOT was particularly hilarious, after 19 Saudis hit us, we promptly turned around and attacked Iraq and Afghanistan.
The coffee would have been a hell of a lot better if they had attacked, say, Italy, or maybe France, I mean, they had about as much to do with 9-11. Oh, yeah, I forgot Libya, how did that work out?
People are being led around by their noses.
There is nothing in Ukraine worth an American life.
Support one corrupt dictator over another. Oh goodie.
Was Vietnam worth it? Who won?
Was Iraq worth it? Who runs the place now?
Was Afghanistan worth it? 80 billion in arms left behind, maybe the Taliban think it was a good deal.
All I see is thousands of dead and wounded Americans, and a military industrial complex made bloated with public money.
Ukraine is a racket like the rest, all the complicated Geo-political theories just top cover for corruption.
At this point, after running away from Afghanistan, and building the new woke army, to think Putin or Xi is going to be deterred by anything we do is humorous. Wait, maybe we could chip some paint and spruce up a few ships- that might show we at least still recognize what a military is supposed to look like. (This country reminds me so much of the last days of the Soviet Union.)
IMO, the only legitimate military goal this country has at this point is defending the border. And it is the one thing they will not do.
Yeah, we all should probably cut our wrists and go away.
But what do I know--I'm either completely corrupt or a total dupe.
Eric Hines
There's probably a middle position between suicide and backing every war to the hilt. Even Conan didn't fight every fight when there were strategic reasons to forgo it.
Mr. Hines, your comments got me thinking- I couldn't put my finger on who I thought really benefitted from the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. Suddenly something in what you were saying lit a bulb over my head- China. China has everything to gain if Russia and the West get pushed into a larger conflict. WE destroy each other, and their economy booms providing industry for the devastated combatants, much as we did after WWII- an unprecedented and what I thought was also not to be repeated anytime soon period. Perhaps the Chinese seek to prove me wrong on that.
Douglas,
That's a possibility I hadn't thought of. It would be like them. And they have the long-view patience for it. I think they're rethinking their RoC invasion plans, but if Russia and we are out of the way, they have a free path for the grinding invasion of RoC to win ultimately, and Russia would not have the wherewithal to resist an earlier-then-planned PRC Anschluss into Siberia.
On the other hand, if Russian and we don't expend very many nuclear warheads, but do expend some, we'll have demonstrated to the PRC that a) we have them, and b) we're willing to use them. Which would give even Xi pause.
On yet another hand, though, the PRC blowing the Nordstreams would--will--have little effect on setting the US and Russia directly at each other's throats. Get through this winter--which seems likely--and Europe will have no further need of Russian energy, so the loss of those two pipelines would be irrelevant.
An alternative path (which I have seen no evidence of) would be for PRC hackers to hit some important items of infrastructure--say government contact with its military establishment--making it look like it was Russian and American hackers doing it each to the other. But that's even harder to do than just blowing up a pipe. Software leaves traces nearly as dispositive as trace elements in mined metals.
There's yet another PRC hand at the table. If Xi wants to seriously block the US, RoK, and Japan, all he has to do is stop exporting rare earths, processed rare earths, lithium, and nickel. Which would hammer Europe, too. Not gradually slow down, stop suddenly and completely. In conjunction with that, he can point out the vulnerability of the shipping lanes that run through the South China Sea: "Pay up, sucker." Russia can, and will, wait.
That will severely damage the PRC economy, too, but that population is more used to a poverty economy than is the developed world outside the Chinese mainland. And to the extent the current generations of Chinese protest, Xi is as ruthless as Mao, and either one of them make the Ayatollahs look gentle.
Eric Hines
Excellent analysis, thank you. Hopefully you're correct that Europe can get through this winter without NS 1&2, without too devastating of side effects. I'm a little less confident than you on that.
I just didn't see almost any negatives for them where for either us or other Western powers, or Russia, I saw major negatives attached, potentially.
One more point regarding nuclear exchanges between Russia and the US: the eddy that brought Chernobyl fallout into Europe notwithstanding, the PRC's arable land is downwind of fallout from nuclear strikes into Russia--and many of Russia's nuclear missile fields are near PRC border, either in the 'Stans Russia still controls, or just outside them. And those strikes will be ground bursts in an effort if not to dig out the missiles, at least to damage the silos.
And an accidental strike--not even necessarily nuclear--on the Three Gorges Dam would finish the job on farmland and on lots of hydro power.
Eric Hines
Post a Comment