Skip to main content

Some notes on Ukraine

 


The first thing to understand about what’s happening in Ukraine is that Ukraine is a democracy, and has done nothing to deserve this. Right now, in our world, an aggressive, authoritarian Russian government is invading its democratic neighbor. This is criminal, and there will be no justice unless Putin and his oligarch friends are put in prison.

When I was a bit younger, Americans seemed to think that the great evils of history were defeated. But greed and corruption will not go gently into that good night. Anti-democratic forces are rising in Asia, in Europe, and in America.

The second thing to understand about what’s happening in Ukraine is that Russia is a fundamentally insecure political entity, and Ukraine is a source of its insecurity.

Ukraine is in a precarious position for two reasons. One reason is that Ukraine is a fertile area, like the American heartland. This is a valuable resource (a resource that Hitler and Stalin both envied, and that Hitler opined for in Mein Kampf). Putin would love full control of this ‘bread basket.’ 

Another reason Ukraine is in a precarious position is that Ukraine is flat, and it is relatively easy for horses (in Napoleons case) or tanks (in Hitler’s case) to traverse from a European country right across Ukraine to Moscow’s doorstep. Putin likes the idea of NATO or the EU in Ukraine about as much as Kennedy liked the idea of Russian missiles in Cuba. It’s just too close to home.

This makes Ukraine’s future difficult. It could be a very nice democratic European country if it was left to its own devices. But the more European it becomes, the more Russia sees it as a threat.

The EU’s recent move to provide arms to Ukraine is a huge strategic decision for the reasons I just discussed (ie an insecure Russia sees European force projection in Ukraine as inherently aggressive). If by some miracle Ukraine continues to hold out, it could make Putin feel he is in a quagmire and look for a way to save face. 

But the EU’s bold move could also cause Putin to double-down and portray the EU’s decision as evidence that he was right to invade in the first place. If Putin backs down he'll appear vulnerable domestically, and he fears that more than any sanctions.

Russia’s history has been one of alternating expansion and implosion. It pushes its influence outward because of its insecurity, and that is difficult to sustain over the long haul. But the long haul can be a generation or more. There are some historical movements that could help Putin maintain its expansion, as the Soviet Union did for a generation. What does the criminal Russian government have going for it?

  • Doubts about democracy. Hey, I don’t have doubts about democracy. But I have doubts about whether democracy is a unifying value like it was after World War II. We are still the nation of Truman and Eisenhower, but we're also the nation of Trump.
  • Oil and gas. Countries with sources of concentrated wealth like oil are perfect for authoritarians. The oil and natural gas Russia produces keeps the cash flowing to Putin and his cronies, and more than one European country will struggle mightily through the winter without Russian energy. If the Europeans aren't buying, China will be thrilled to get that energy at a discount.

I recently read Prisoners of Geography, and I recommend it to you. It's a straightforward explanation of geopolitical determinism, which is important to understanding how we and other nations behave. 

If you’re interested in learning more about Putin and his history of corruption, check out the videos of Alexei Navalny. Putin had Navalny poisoned and later imprisoned as a consequence of Navalny’s journalism and political activity. This particular video is real long, but it's actually pretty entertaining.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_tFSWZXKN0

I’m a fan of Timothy Snyder’s work, and he’s got lots of YouTube videos out there talking about the history of Eastern Europe and Putin’s philosophy. I recommend his book On Tyranny, which is an easy read. I recommend his book Black Earth, which is not an easy read. If you’re interested in trying to help Ukraine directly, the list of links below are from Tim Snyder's newsletter.

As with any other issue, directly contacting your elected officials is an important way to influence US policy. I believe our opposition to Putin’s aggression should be strong, sustained, and active.

One of the best things we can do is support democracy here in our own back yards. Support free and convenient access to the vote for all Americans. Oppose political gerrymandering. Be suspicious about the influence of money in politics. Don’t look at countries like Russia and think “that could never happen here.” Instead, look for ways to safeguard our democracy here and now.


Links for help, via Tim Snyder’s newsletter:

NGO that arranges life-saving equipment for Ukrainian soldiers: https://savelife.in.ua/en/donate

Hospitallers working at the frontline: https://www.facebook.com/hospitallers/posts/2953630548255167

Ukrainian Women’s Veteran Movement: https://www.uwvm.org.ua/?page_id=3437&lang=en

NGO that assists internal refugees: https://unitedhelpukraine.org/

NGO that assistants internal refugees, especially from Crimea: https://www.peaceinsight.org/en/organisations/crimea-sos/?location=ukraine&theme

NGO that aids traumatised children: https://voices.org.ua/en/

Foundation that assists healthcare and education in eastern Ukraine: https://razomforukraine.org/projects/zhadan/


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Welfare for the wealthy

I was struck by today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Not literally, but in the Crossroads section, on opposite sides of the spread, were two articles that reflect our nation's "welfare for the rich." On 2J, a local economics instructor's article "Tax for Miller Park didn't help economy." He criticized a previous article which had suggested the opposite. The previous article was based almost entirely on reports by Major League Baseball, which clearly has a huge bias. This week's article takes an objective look, and summarizes that taxpayer's don't get much in return, but the fat cat players and executives of MLB walk away with huge paychecks. The drive to fund new ballparks almost never starts with taxpayers--it starts with the deep pockets of baseball executives, PR campaigns and connections with political power. On 3J, George Will was taking on the Fed ("What the Fed should never do"), rightly criticizing it for bailing out Bear

New Yorker letter to editor

(In The New Yorker, 2/4/08, p5) Jeanne Guillemin, a senior fellor in MIT's Security Studies Program, wrote an excellent letter to the editor regarding how Americans talk about casualties. I'm unable to find a link to a full-text example, but here is an excerpt: "In wars since 1945, American combat mortality figures have sharply declined, while the exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization has intensified, as if U.S. soldiers were the only casualties in Korea or Vietnam or, more recently, Iraq, and the deaths of many thousands of civilians killed in those distant conflicts merited no acknowledgment and carried no meaning. Whose deaths matter and whose do not always tells a great deal about American politics and culture."

Real Estate in America

We sold our house this summer and bought a new home. The experience has led me to reflect on homes and home-buying in America. As in any industry, there are good and bad incentives at work in real estate. A home seller would like to get the highest price for their house and sell it in a reasonable period of time. The industry operates on a commission system so that the agent seeks to sell the house at a higher price. This incentive works, but only to a point. Consider the impact of $5000 on the seller vs. the agent. Six percent of $5000 is $300. After the realty company and purchasing agent take their cut, the agent isn't left with much. A $5000 difference in the price of the house means little to the agent, but a lot to the home owner. Does an agent become successful by getting the highest price or by turning over lots of houses? The answer is obvious. An agent's ideal world is not one where people get exactly the right price for their homes, it is a world where everyone is wi