Vladimir Putin’s worst nightmare — a trucker-Maidan.
Dmytro Homon writes:
First, the protest is spontaneous and is not coordinated from a single center. For that reason, the police have been unable to shut it down because other drivers immediately take the place of the ones detained.
Second, the protestors are not the usual “fifth column” opposition by intellectuals. These are, for the most part, Putin’s voters — tough guys who in elections vote for stability…….
Third, all Russians clearly understand the complaints of the truck drivers. They boil down to the fact that greedy authorities are trying to take the shirt off the back of simple workers…..
For these reasons the usual methods of Russian propaganda are not very effective. The postings of the Olgino trolls (professional commentators from the “troll factory” in the Olgino district of St. Petersburg — Ed.) that these protests are organized by the opposition look ridiculous. Attempts by mass media to ignore the truckers completely are equally ineffective because they have become a major topic in social networks……
Meanwhile, more and more trucks have been arriving to Moscow. What will happen next is a question with no answer yet. In fact, even the truckers themselves do not know what to do after the blockade.
If the Russian authorities use brute force, this risks repeating the fate of Yanukovych. Putin, however, has nowhere to flee from the Kremlin. Well, perhaps to Syria…..
A surprisingly even-handed documentary of the battle for Donetsk Airport. The overwhelming hardship and sacrifice endured by both sides merely underlines this stark message:
There are no victors in this conflict. Only victims.
The war should not have happened. It was instigated by a cynical politician 1000 kilometers away (in Moscow) to stoke nationalist fervor and shore up dwindling public support. His callous disregard for the sacrifice of Russian and Ukrainian lives, and the economic hardship endured by his fellow citizens — a price he considers worth paying to extend his presidency — highlights what the world faces.
He considers the West weak and vacillating. The sooner we face down this threat, the safer our world will be. These words from William Shakespeare (King John, Act 5, Scene 1) still apply today:
Be great in act, as you have been in thought;
Let not the world see fear and sad distrust
Govern the motion of a kingly eye:
Be stirring as the time; be fire with fire;
Threaten the threatener and outface the brow
Of bragging horror: so shall inferior eyes,
That borrow their behaviors from the great,
Grow great by your example and put on
The dauntless spirit of resolution.
….What, shall they seek the lion in his den,
And fright him there? and make him tremble there?
O, let it not be said: forage, and run
To meet displeasure farther from the doors,
And grapple with him ere he comes so nigh.
The group consists of two emerging industrial economies (China & India) and three commodity exporters (Brazil, Russia, South Africa). Their interests are bound to diverge, especially when slowing Chinese growth drives commodity prices lower.
Since the time of Catherine the Great, Crimea has been a global tinderbox. Most recently, the world was stunned when the forces of Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded and seized Crimea in March 2014. In the months since, Putin’s actions in Crimea, eastern Ukraine and, more recently, in Syria have provoked a sharp deterioration in East-West relations. Basic questions have been raised about Putin’s provocative policies, his motivations, and the future of U.S.-Russian relations—and whether the world has now entered a new Cold War.
On October 26, the Foreign Policy program at Brookings hosted Nonresident Senior Fellow Marvin Kalb for the launch of his new book, “Imperial Gamble: Putin, Ukraine, and the New Cold War” (Brookings Institution Press, 2015). In “Imperial Gamble,” Kalb examines Putin’s actions in Ukraine, the impact on East-West relations, and how the future of the post-Cold War world hangs on the controversial decisions of one reckless autocrat, Vladimir Putin.
Joining the discussion were Thomas Friedman, The New York Times columnist, and Nina Khrushcheva, professor of international relations at The New School. Brookings President Strobe Talbott provided introductory remarks, and Martin Indyk, Brookings executive vice president, moderated the discussion.
Crude futures (Light Crude December 2015 – CLZ2015) are testing support at $44.50 per barrel. Follow-through below $44.00 would signal another test of primary support at $40. Supply continues to exceed demand with the Saudis and Russians cranking up production and cutting prices to secure key markets in the US and China. Breach of $40 would offer a (long-term) target of $30*. Recovery above $50 per barrel is most unlikely unless there is a serious disruption to supply.
While the sharp decline in crude prices has saved crude consuming nations hundreds of billions of dollars, the loss in revenues has caused crude exporting countries intense economic and financial pain. Their suffering has led some to call for a change in strategy to “balance” the market and boost prices. Venezuela, an OPEC member, has even proposed an emergency summit meeting.
In practice, the call for a change is a call for Saudi Arabia and Russia, the two dominant global crude exporters, which each daily export over seven-plus mmbbls (including condensates and NGLs) and which each see the other as the key to any “balancing” moves, to bear the brunt of any production cuts…….
Despite the intense pain they are suffering in the low price Crudedome, both the Russian and Saudi governments profess for public consumption that they are committed to their volume and market share policies.
This observer believes the two countries cannot long withstand the pain they have brought upon themselves — and this article only scratches the surface of the negative impact of low crude prices on their economies. They have, in effect, turned no pain no gain into intense pain no gain and set in motion the possibility neither will exit the low price Crudedome under its own power.
Always interesting to listen to James Sherr of Chatham House discuss global geo-politics.
http://www.rferl.org/audio/27310324.html
Can the West contain a Russia that is determined to upend the international order — but which at the same time is deeply integrated into the global economy?
The latest Power Vertical Podcast tackles these questions with guests James Sherr, an associate fellow with — and former head of — Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia program, and Daniel Drezner, a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and author of the books Theories Of International Politics And Zombies and the recently published The System Worked: How The World Stopped Another Great Depression.
Winston Churchill, denouncing the Munich Agreement in the House of Commons, declared:
“We have suffered a total and unmitigated defeat … you will find that in a period of time which may be measured by years, but may be measured by months, Czechoslovakia will be engulfed in the Nazi régime. We are in the presence of a disaster of the first magnitude … we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road … we have passed an awful milestone in our history, when the whole equilibrium of Europe has been deranged, and that the terrible words have for the time being been pronounced against the Western democracies: “Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting”. And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”
On 3 October 1938, Churchill added:
“England has been offered a choice between war and shame. She has chosen shame, and will get war.”