Putin declares war on Europe

Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is an effective declaration of war against Europe.

This will no more stop at Kyiv than Hitler stopped at the Sudetenland.

Tragic sites of refugees fleeing Russian bombing and helicopter-borne invasion forces occupying Hostomel Airport military airfield, 15 minutes outside the capital.

Twitter

Twitter

Twitter

All of this could have been avoided if the West had shown more resolve.

Kicking the can down the road

The West has been kicking the can down the road for the past 15 years hoping that the problem would go away. Ever since Vladimir Putin laid out his agenda at the Munich security conference in 2007, the West has tried to buy him off with reset buttons and lucrative gas contracts, looking the other way as he embarked on his expansionist plans, starting with invasion of Georgia the following year.

From Ambassador Daniel Fried and Kurt Volker in Politico, seven days ago:

What is more surprising is how the U.S. and Europe, despite Putin’s obvious warning in Munich and Russia’s many actions over 15 years, have nonetheless clung to the notion that we can somehow work together with Putin’s Russia on a strategic level. It is finally time for the West to face facts. Whether or not Putin launches a major new invasion of Ukraine, he has rejected the post-Cold War European security architecture and means it. He is on a deliberate and dedicated path to build a greater Russia, an empire where the Soviet Union once stood…..

Following the speech, Putin matched his words with actions, dismantling the structures designed to keep peace in post-Cold War Europe. Russia formally announced in July 2007 that it would no longer adhere to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty. It continued to reject the principle of host-nation consent for its troop presence in Georgia and Moldova, and began ignoring Vienna Convention limits on troop concentrations, exercises and transparency.

Judge a tree by the fruit it bears

Europe continued to build a trade relationship with Russia, in the hope that prosperity would mellow Putin. Instead the Kremlin used its oil and gas profits to rearm and modernize its military while cracking down on political opposition and a free press. Deaths of journalists and opposition politicians climbed. Eastern NATO leaders who repeatedly warned the West about the need to confront Russia were dismissed as “warmongers”.

By this stage, the Kremlin had even taken its war against opposition figures abroad, with the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006.

Alexander Litvinenko

In 1998, Litvinenko and several other FSB officers had publicly accused their superiors of ordering the assassination of the Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky. Litvinenko was arrested the following year but acquitted before being re-arrested. The charges were again dismissed and Litvinenko fled with his family to London where they were granted asylum in the UK. He later wrote two books accusing the Russian secret services of staging the Russian apartment bombings in 1999 and other acts of terrorism in an effort to bring Putin to power. He also accused Putin of ordering the assassination of the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya in 2006. Litvinenko died of polonium-210 poisoning that same year, in London.

A UK public inquiry concluded in 2016 that Litvinenko’s murder was carried out by the two suspects and that they were “probably” acting under the direction of the FSB and with the approval of president Vladimir Putin and then FSB director Nikolai Patrushev.

The Obama Reset

On his election in 2009, Barack Obama sought to reset the relationship with Russia, as if the West was to blame for:

  • the attempted assassination of Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko during his 2004 election campaign — he was poisoned with a potent dioxin that disfigured him but later made a full recovery;
  • widespread denial-of-service cyber attacks on Estonia in 2007; and
  • invasion of Georgia in 2008.

The reset failed badly, with Russia annexing Crimea and invading the Donbas in 2014. Next was Syria in 2015. Responses by the West, including limited sanctions, proved ineffective.

The Salisbury poisonings

In 2018, Russia was the first state to employ chemical weapons against private citizens in a foreign country. In Salisbury, England, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a Russian citizen, visiting him from Moscow, were poisoned with a Russian-developed Novichok nerve agent and admitted to hospital in a critical condition. UK Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of responsibility for the incident and announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats in retaliation. A former Russian intelligence officer, Skripal had settled in the UK in 2010 after his conviction on espionage charges in Russia before being exchanged in a spy swap. Both Skripal and his daughter eventually recovered. Moscow refused to cooperate in the interrogation of the two prime suspects, identified by Bellingcat as Alexander Mishkin, a trained military doctor, working for the GRU, and decorated GRU Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga.

GRU Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga and Alexander Mishkin, a trained military doctor, working for the GRU

Conclusion

The signs have been evident for a long time but were largely ignored.

This was always going to end badly. The longer that the West delays, the worse the eventual toll in lives and human suffering.

Former Swedish PM Carl Bildt sums up the situation:

Carl Bildt

The Putin invasion of Ukraine that we now see unfolding is the worst outbreak of war that we have had since Hitler invaded Poland in September of 1939. The same motives, the same techniques, the same lies leading up to it. What will happen now remains to be seen. Sanctions will have to be imposed, although that particular deterrence has obviously failed, but it was good to try. We must help the fight in Ukraine. We must treat the Putin regime in the way that it deserves, in all respects. We are heading for bleak days when it comes to the security of Europe. Transatlantic security will be absolutely key.

What would Putin do?

The Communist Party of China has an unwritten contract with the 1.4 billion people living under its rule: they will tolerate living under an autocratic regime provided that the CCP delivers economic prosperity. So far the CCP has delivered in spades. A never-ending economic boom, fueled by exponential debt growth as investment in productive infrastructure grows ever more challenging.

But they are now familiar with the law of diminishing marginal returns: governments can’t just keep spending on infrastructure without falling into a debt trap. All the low-hanging fruit have been picked and new infrastructure projects offer lower and lower returns as spending programs continue.

That was probably the primary motivation for the CCP’s Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI): to source more productive infrastructure investments in international markets. But the COVID-19 pandemic brought the BRI to a shuddering halt and the CCP is unlikely to maintain its exemplary growth record — no matter how much they fudge the numbers.

Xi Jinping is faced with an impossible task: how to placate 1.4 billion people when inflation sends food prices soaring and ballooning debt precipitates a sharp rise in unemployment and falling wages. The CCP has been preparing for this very eventuality for some time. Investing billions in surveillance and social credit systems, brutal crackdowns on religious organizations and minorities, suppression of democratic forces in Hong Kong, the latest take-down of tech giants — Jack Ma’s Ant Group and Tencent Holdings — which could form a focal point for democratic opposition, and beefing up internal policing. These are not the whims of an autocratic regime but a desperate attempt at self-preservation. China’s internal security budget is even bigger than its military budget (WION).

Xi Jinping

Behind that inscrutable facade, Xi Jinping is a worried man. Even with all the technology and forces of suppression at his disposal, confronting an angry population of 1.4 billion people is a daunting task. In his darkest hours he must have asked himself the question: WHAT WOULD PUTIN DO?

Even if you don’t believe the RT hype of the bare-chested deer hunter, judo expert and chess grandmaster — a combination of Chuck Norris and Garry Kasparov — you have to give Vladimir Putin credit for surviving 20 years as the head of a murderous regime where only the strong and completely ruthless stay alive.

Vladimir Putin

What would Putin do? The answer must have hit Xi Jinping like a 500 watt light bulb: INVADE CRIMEA. Vladimir Putin enjoyed record popularity at home (if you can believe Russian opinion polls) after invading Crimea. Despite the economic hardships that the Russian people had to endure from Western sanctions. The only force more powerful than hunger is a wave of patriotic nationalism.

Now being the canny fellow that he is, Xi figured that Crimea was too far away to be much use. Luckily for him, there is a handy substitute. An island of 23.5 million inhabitants, living under a democratically-elected government, only 180 kilometers away, across the Taiwan Strait.

Conclusion

We expect the CCP to fuel a wave of nationalist fervor to distract the 1.4 billion people living under their harsh rule from the economic hardships they are about to endure. Conflict over Taiwan is an obvious choice.

At present the PLA is conducting daily incursions into Taiwanese airspace, to map ROC air defense systems and wear down defenders with “response fatigue”.

ROC Reports Incursion by 28 PLA Aircraft

The CCP would not want to interfere with the Beijing Winter Olympics but may use it as a distraction — straight out of Putin’s playbook.

Melik Kaylan at Forbes:

I can say one thing about Vladimir Putin without fear of contradiction: he cares about timing. When he’s up to no good, he loves a sleight-of-hand distraction in global headlines. In 2008 [invasion of Georgia], the Beijing summer Olympics served as cover. More recently, the Sochi Winter Olympics ended just three days before Russia marched into Crimea.

Notes

  1. The 2022 Winter Olympics — also known as Beijing 2022 — is scheduled to take place from 4 to 20 February 2022.

Putin Will Never Back Down | Institutional Investor’s Alpha

Excellent analysis of the situation in Eastern Europe by Bill Browder, founder of London-based Hermitage Capital Management:

I’m afraid that, based on the reasons behind Putin’s motivations for invading Ukraine in the first place, there is no chance that he will back down. To understand this, all it takes is a simple analysis of how this crisis unfolded.

First, Putin didn’t start this war because of NATO enlargement or historical ties to Crimea, as many analysts have stated. Putin started this war out of fear of being overthrown like Ukrainian president Yanukovych in February 2014. Yanukovych had been stealing billions from the state over many years, and the Ukrainian people finally snapped and overthrew him. Compared with Putin, Yanukovych was a junior varsity player in the field of kleptocracy. For every dollar Yanukovych stole, Putin and his cronies probably stole 50. Putin understands that if he loses power in Russia, he and his underlings will lose all the money they stole; he will lose his freedom and possibly even his life.

I believe that Bill is right. Putin was not reacting to EU or NATO encroachment (they were never a threat), but to Maidan. Especially when we read Michael McFaul’s (former ambassador to Russia) summation of Putin: “He is obsessed with the CIA…..With respect Ukraine he believes the US led the coup in the Ukraine. The Ukrainians had nothing to do with it. It was all the CIA.”

Former Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul

….. Putin has never dealt with economic chaos before. Though some may argue that this will bring him to the table to negotiate with the West, in my opinion any negotiation would be seen as a sign of weakness and is therefore the last thing Putin would want to do.

Putin’s only likely response is to escalate in Ukraine and possibly open up new fronts in other countries where there are “Russians to protect.” But doing so will only harden the sanctions, leading to further economic pain in Russia — and further military adventures to distract Russia’s people from that pain.

I cannot imagine a scenario in which there is any compromise, because for Putin compromise means being overthrown. Judging from all of his actions to date, he is ready to destroy his country for his own self-preservation.

We should start preparing ourselves for a war in Europe that may spread well beyond the borders of Ukraine. The only Western response to this has to be containment. This all may sound alarmist, but I’ve spent the past eight years in my own war with Putin, and I have a few insights about him that are worth knowing.

In Putin’s mind, he is fighting for survival. The US/EU/Nato and Ukraine are just a convenient scapegoat. His real enemy is the Russian people. This 1945 image of Benito Mussolini, his mistress Clara Petacci, and three others hanging outside a petrol station in Milan must haunt his dreams.
Bodies of Benito Mussolini, his mistress Clara Petacci, and three others hanging outside a petrol station in Milan

When they realize they have been duped, the anger of the Russian people will be palpable.

Read the full article at Unhedged Commentary: Putin Will Never Back Down | Institutional Investor's Alpha.

Ukraine: An opposing point of view

I received this from a long-time subscriber and requested permission to publish in the interest of presenting both points of view:

Dear Colin,
Being a subscriber to Incredible charts for many years and liking it very much, for some external reasons I was not reading articles for a long time, but when I happened to read the latest “Europe leads markets lower” article I was completely taken aback how it is politically charged and how it seems to be based on mass media propaganda, not on unbiased facts and analysis… It does not leave a good impression at all. I don’t mind other people having their own opinion, but I think that it should not be imposed on others in supposedly non-political, business articles, so may we respectfully ask your editors to refrain from politically motivated language and argumentation in the business articles and leave it to politicians and political forums instead ? I am talking about the anti-Russian bias and rhetoric – I am a Ukrainian citizen and lived in Ukraine for 30 years before moving to Australia 20+ years ago and I still have friends living in Ukraine, so I think that I am a bit more qualified on this topic than Mr. Abbott’s speeches or Mr. Murdoch’s newspapers. The plain fact is that neo-nazi thugs came to power in Ukraine as the result of coup-de-tat in February (supported and sponsored by some Western countries) and once the Constitution was thrown out of window, the law and order does not exist any more there (so called theory of “controlled chaos” is in full swing), all power ministry heads and many personnel were replaced with ultra-nationalists, civil war was started and atrocious war crimes are committed as we speak – anyone with the different view to people in power at the moment is declared an enemy, people are disappearing, burned alive (in Odessa on 2nd of May), etc. Ukrainian army and semi-legal “national guards” battalions are bombarding south-east regions after they declared that they are not recognising Kiev’s neo-nazi government and everyone who knows a little bit of history would understand why that was their choice voted in referendum by majority of these regions population. This has nothing to do with Russia, but has everything to do with the people in power in Ukraine and their western supporters. In fact, Russia’s showed and still showing a great deal of patience for so many years and seems to be the only country that tries to find some peaceful solution without depriving people of their basic rights to choose the way of living. As for Crimea, this was Russian people/territory for hundreds of years until year 1954 when it was given (read stolen) by decree from the then General Secretary of USSR communist party of Ukrainian nationality and that decree was not legal even by laws of that time – no one raised strong objections at the time simply because it was the same country anyway. Later, when breaking apart Soviet Union (again not legally and against the will of people who spoke on referendum), no one cared about sorting this out properly and for 23 years Ukraine was ruling in Crimea while Russia and people of Crimea were somewhat patient about it until the February coup-de-tat in Kiev and neo-nazi coming to power. Parliament and people of Crimea made their choice very clear in law and referendum where 97% of people voted to become independent state (not unlike Kosovo so cherished by Western countries) and their natural choice and only protection would be to ask Russia to join it which Russia accepted and why it should not ? People of Crimea were saying at the time that “we may not be joining the Heaven in Russia, but definitely we are escaping the Hell” which is exactly what happens now in the former south-east region of Ukraine. If anything, Mr. Obama and other western leaders should stop baseless and counter-productive aggression against Russia and tell their buddies in Kiev to stop this violence and start diplomatic efforts. My apologies for such a long email, but I am just very saddened by the way how it is portrayed in Western media – brainwashing people who are not multilingual and cannot access alternative points of view.
Regards,
Name Withheld

Dear Name Withheld,
I appreciate you taking the time to write and express your views.

I am very concerned about the state of affairs in Eastern Europe. It is, and always has been, a tinder box. And one unintentional spark can start a fire that none of the parties intended. Respect for borders and for the rights of other countries and their citizens is one of the fundamental safeguards to prevent such outbreaks of war. Russia, no matter how strong a regional power, does not have the right to simply take territory by force because it once belonged to them or because they need the territory as a “buffer” to protect themselves from “encirclement” or outright aggression. If all states acted like that we would be in a constant state of war. They have to respect the conventions designed to safeguard the world from future wars and pursue the matter through negotiation or the international courts.

If history serves me correctly, the territory is neither Russian or Ukrainian, but Crimean. It should be up to the people who reside in the region and those who originate from there, like the Tartars, to negotiate its future and not be subjected to a ballot at the point of a gun.

Please can I post your letter on my blog in the interests of giving both points of view — with your name withheld if you wish.

Regards,
Colin

Vladimir Putin’s irrational behavior: Why the Russian president wins if we think he is crazy.

Scott Radnitz suggests that Vladimir Putin is not crazy — just deliberately acting that way.

….consider strategic theorist Thomas Schelling’s concept of the “rationality of irrationality.” This can be illustrated through the game of chicken, in which two drivers are heading for each other at full speed, and the first to swerve is the chicken. A driver who appears crazy enough to prefer dying over chickening out will always have the advantage. It is therefore rational for a player to convince his opponent that he is actually irrational.

Read more at Vladimir Putin’s irrational behavior: Why the Russian president wins if we think he is crazy..

How Ukraine Can Move Forward | Cato Institute

Dalibor Rohac at the Cato Institute suggest the Ukraine should focus on getting its economy back on track:

….to really understand where Ukraine is headed, it’s important to understand the roots of the unrest that led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych.

First, the country’s oligarchic elite, which ruled the country for the past two decades, cared little about the prosperity of ordinary Ukrainians. The evidence is not just in the tacky mansions of President Yanukovych and his men, but also in the fact that the average income in Ukraine is roughly one third of that in Poland even though both countries started from around the same point in 1990.

Second, the change of government in Ukraine follows a miscalculation on the part of the Kremlin, which long considered Ukraine as its client state, dependent on imports of natural gas from Russia. Ukrainians simply lost patience after their government effectively followed instructions from Moscow and canceled the broadly popular association agreement with the EU. Now that the plan to bully Ukrainians into submission has backfired, Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely to leverage the situation to push claims to parts of Russian-speaking Eastern Ukraine — most prominently Crimea and the port of Sevastopol.

Regardless of whether such territorial concessions become a reality, with an interim cabinet in place and a new presidential election scheduled for late May, it is time for Ukraine to reckon with the massive governance failure of the past twenty years.

The best response to Putin’s land grab would be to turn Ukraine into an economic success story and example to its large neighbor to the East.

Read more at How Ukraine Can Move Forward | Cato Institute.

Sanctions nerves ripple through Moscow | FT.com

The Financial Times quotes Igor Yurgens, a former Kremlin adviser:

He added that capital flight was likely to soar. He said his bank had received “a huge number of calls” into his bank’s Swiss offices from Russian clients over the past two weeks and a number of wire transfers into Swiss bank accounts out of Russia. Clients, he said, would prefer to keep money outside the country despite the risk of asset freezes.

Read more at Sanctions nerves ripple through Moscow – FT.com.

Europe’s Five Deadly Sins on Ukraine | Carnegie Europe

Jan Techau of Carnegie Europe writes:

….In recent years, Russian President Vladimir Putin has talked about the Kremlin’s fears of Western encirclement. He has declared that EU and NATO enlargement are part of a conspiracy to destroy Russia, that Ukraine is not really a sovereign nation, and that Western agents provocateurs were behind Ukraine’s 2004–2005 Orange Revolution.

Amid all that rhetoric, the West failed to recognize that Putin was deadly serious. Such talk was dismissed either as cheap propaganda or as the mild lunacy of a handful of overideologized true believers. Nobody imagined that Putin himself really believed his own bluster.

But for the Russian president, the fight over Ukraine is not an imperialistic adventure, it is a fight for survival against a mortal Western enemy. Just because observers in the West know that’s nonsense, that doesn’t mean that others think the same. Such Western projections were finally debunked when German Chancellor Angela Merkel remarked to U.S. President Barack Obama on March 2 that Putin was “in another world.”

Read more at Europe’s Five Deadly Sins on Ukraine – Carnegie Europe.

Recession time for Russia | The Market Monetarist

Lars Christensen at The Market Monetarist writes:

….. sharply increased geo-political tensions in relationship to Putin’s military intervention on the peninsula of Crimea has clearly shocked foreign investors who are now dumping Russian assets on large scale. Just Monday this week the Russian stock market fell in excess of 10% and some of the major bank stocks lost 20% of their value on a single day.

In response to this massive outflow the Russian central bank – foolishly in my view – hiked its key policy rate by 150bp and intervened heavily in the currency market to prop up the rouble on Monday. Some commentators have suggested that the CBR might have spent more than USD 10bn of the foreign currency reserve just on Monday. Thereby inflicting greater harm to the Russian economy than any of the planned sanctions by EU and the US against Russia.

By definition a drop in foreign currency reserve translates directly into a contraction in the money base combined with the CBR’s rate hike we this week has seen a very significant tightening of monetary conditions in Russia – something which is likely to send the Russian economy into recession (understood as one or two quarters of negative real GDP growth).

Read more at Recession time for Russia – the ultra wonkish version | The Market Monetarist.

The Crimean principle

The Crimean regional government in the Ukraine plans to hold a referendum, to leave Ukraine and join the Russian Federation, amongst its predominantly Russian-speaking population. The Russian parliament has voiced its over-whelming support for the idea.

Gary Kasparov, former world chess champion and member of the Russian opposition, points out that the same principle could apply to Kaliningrad.

Geographically isolated from the rest of Russia, Kaliningrad — formerly known as Königsberg — was part of Germany (East Prussia) until annexed by Josef Stalin at the end of WWII.

Kaliningrad